In  Defense  of  Religion  and 


the  Dignity  of  Labor 


OR 


*  ? 


Can  There  Be  True  Morality  Without 
Religion  in  Any  System 
of  Education? 

By  REV.  JOSEPH  J.  O’CONNELL 

RECTOR  ST.  STEPHEN’S  CHURCH 
PORT  CARBON,  PA. 


In  Reply  to 

ROBERT  F\  DITCH  BURN 

Supt.  of  Public  Schools  at  Tamaqua,  Pa.,  anti  President  of  the  Edu¬ 
cational  Association  of  Schuylkill  County,  Pa. 


PUBLISHED  BY  CHRONICLE  PUBLISHING  CO. 
Pottsville,  Pa.,  1905 

Air.  Ditchburn’s  Lecture  Alay  be  Found  as  an 
Appendix  to  This  Pamphlet 


All  Rights  Reserved 


Third  Edition 


Single  Copies  10c.;  $0.00  per  100;  $55.90  per  1,000 


— 

- 


WORKING  MEN  INFERIOR  ANIMALS 


From  Brann's  Iconoclast  of  July,  1903. 

Harrison  Smalley,  instructor  in  the  Department  of  Economics  at 
the  University  of  Michigan,  in  one  of  his  recent  lectures,  said: 

“But,  comparing  men  purely  as  animal  matter,  the  laborer  is  an 
inferior  animal.  A  hundred  years  ago  it  was  believed  that  all  men 
were  created  equal;  that  theory  was  all  in  the  air.  Thus  we  have 
come  habitually  to  underestimate  the  fact — fact,  I  say — that  some  men, 
as  some  animals,  are  inferior  to  others. 

“This  difference  exists  in  all  animals.  We  see  it  in  the  breeding  of 
horses  and  dogs.  Some  horses  are  worth  $5,  where  others  are  good 
for  hundreds,  and  only  blood  and  birth  make  the  difference. 

“The  laborer  has  not  the  rich,  warm,  blue  blood  which  denotes 
physical  superiority.” 

This  man  Smalley,  or,  to  be  more  accurate,  this  “Smalley”  man, 
gives  form  and  utterances  to  a  sentiment  and  belief  that  is  now  being 
engendered  in  all  commercialized,  trust-endowed  colleges  and  univer¬ 
sities,  and  the  virus  is  spreading  rapidly  to  other  institutions  of  learn¬ 
ing. 

It  is  this  kind  of  doctoring  that  touches  the  gizzard  and  calls 
forth  large  donations  in  the  name  of  “education”  and  “philanthropy.” 

“A  hundred  years  ago  it  was  believed  that  all  men  were  created 
equal.  That  theory  was  all  in  the  air.” 

It  lias  always  been  “in  the  air”  so  far  as  despots  were  concerned. 
Nobody  who  wanted  to  rob,  kill,  or  oppress  his  fellow  man  ever  had 
any  use  for  the  declaration,  that  “all  men  are  created  equal.”  Nobody, 
a  hundred  years  ago,  or  at  any  other  time,  ever  believed  that  all  men 
were  created  equal,  physically,  mentally,  or  morally.  But  the  found¬ 
ers  of  this  Republic  believed,  and  declared  it  to  be  a  self-evident  truth, 
that  all  men  are  created  equal  with  regard  to  their  inalienable  rights 
to  life,  liberty,  the  pursuit  of  happiness  and  a  voice  in  their  own  gov¬ 
ernment.  A  hundred  years  ago  that  great  truth  was  disputed  by  snobs, 
plutocrats,  kings,  tyrants,  thieves  and  murderers,  just  as  it  is  denied 
to-day  by  parasites,  pirates  and  pin-lieaded  professors.  Thousands  of 
years  ago — when  men  were  only  a  little  higher  than  monkeys — Smal¬ 
ley’s  theory  anent  the  “inferiority”  of  the  “laborer”  was  universally  ac¬ 
cepted  without  question  or  comment. 

Every  achievement  of  science,  education,  art  and  invention  stands 
as  a  monument  to  the  man  who  works. 

This  “inferior  animal,”  in  every  age  and  clime,  has  tilled  the  fields, 
bridged  the  rivers,  tunneled  the  mountains,  torn  from  the  bosom  of 
the  earth  every  ounce  of  iron,  silver  and  gold,  in  use  by  man;  built 
every  vessel  that  plows  the  seas,  constructed  every  road-bed,  every 
train,  and  his  hand  is  on  the  throbbing  throttle  of  the  mighty  engine 
that  moves  the  industrial  world.  His  ideas  are  woven  into  the  warp, 
and  woof  of  every  garment  of  glory  that  decks  the  form  of  the  rich 
and  mighty.  There  is  no  hovel  and  no  palace  that  he  did  not  build! 
no  town  or  city  that  his  hands  did  not  rear.  The  laborer — the  com¬ 
moner  is  the  Atlas  upon  whose  broad  shoulders  rests  this  majestic 
world.  He  has  ever  been  the  herald  and  pioneer  of  progress.  Every 
human  being  who  has  helped  to  enlighten,  beautify,  advance  and  glor¬ 
ify  the  world  and  restore  man  to  his  heritage  as  the  offspring  of  God, 
belonged  to  the  laboring  class — insulted  and  denounced  by  Prof.  Smal¬ 
ley  as  an  “inferior  animal.” 


Professor  Robert  F.  Ditchburn,  Superintendent  of  Public  Schools  at 
Tama  qua,  said  in  the  Pottsville  Evening  Chronicle  of  Jan.  il,  1904: 

“POVERTY  IS  A  STANDING  MENACE.” 

“Morality  is  never  high  where  people  have  to  struggle  from  early 
morn  till  far  into  the  night  for  the  meanest  neesssaries  of  life.  The 
morality  of  an  empty  stomach  is  a  weak  one,  and  the  lady  was  right 
when  she  said  T  always  feel  most  Godly  in  good  clothes.’  Morality  is 
alwajs  low  in  mean,  miserable  tenements.  We  ought  not  to  expect 
much  from  children  reared  in  a  filthy  alley,  their  neighbors  on  the  one 
side  li\  ing  in  a  stable  and  on  the  other  in  a  hog  pen.” — There  is  a 
deep  significance  in  the  word  ‘poor  but  honest.’  ” 

I  is  said  that:  “Great  minds  run  in  the  same  groove!” 


\ 


ST.  STEPHEN’S  PARSONAGE  AND  CHURCH,  PORT  CARBON,  PA 


ST.  STEPHEN’S  SCHOOL  AND  CONVENT,  PORT  CARBON,  PA. 


« 


“FIAT  LUX” 

THE  LATEST  AND  BEST  ON  THE 
“PERENNIAL  SCHOOL  QUESTION ”  IS 

IReltgtonr  jfloralttp 

“Can  tftctc  6e  Ctue  eporalitp  in  anp 
of  CDucation  toftfcout  Eeligionf  ” 

BY  THE 

REV.  JOSEPH  J.  O’CONNELL 

RECTOR  OF  ST.  STEPHEN’S  CHURCH,  PORT  CARBON,  PA. 

PUBLISHED 

Cunt  Prantegu  fempraorum 

AND  COMPRISING 

The  Published  Views  of  Non-Catholic  Statesmen,  Churchmen  and 
Editors  from  Washington  to  Roosevelt,  inclusive,  in  regard  to  the 
necessity  of  “  Religious  Education  ”  for  the  children  of  our  land 


What  the  Reviewers  say  of  It 

The  pamphlet  is  a  notable  addition 
to  the  literature  on  the  school  question. 
— Holy  Family  Magazine. 

These  articles  are  remarkable  for 
their  logic  and  reasonable  tone. 
—  Catholic  Standard  and  Times. 

The  soundness  and  vigor  of  Father 
O’Connell’s  work  are  unquestionable. 
—Catholic  News. 

The  pamphlet  is  well  worth  buying 
and  keeping  and  consulting. — Sacred 
Heart  Review. 

The  pamphlet  will  prove  a  handy 
magazine  for  those  who  have  to  deal 
with  the  school  question. — Ave  Maria. 

What  Churchmen  say  of  the 
Pamphlet 

It  is  the  clearest,  cleverest  and  most 
comprehensive  treatise  on  the  subject 
that  I  have  yet  seen. — The  Right  Kev. 
John  W.  Shanahan,  D.D.,  Bishop 
of  Harrisburg,  Pa. 

I  am  glad  to  have  in  so  convenient 
a  form  so  many  valuable  quotations 
from  such  prominent  people. — The 
Right  Rev.  Michael  J.  Hoban,  D.D., 
Bishop  of  Scranton,  Pa. 

The  pamphlet  has  my  highest  com¬ 
mendation.  I  could  wish  to  see  a  copy 
of  it  in  the  hands  of  every  family  in  the 
land. — The  Very  Rev.  P.  J.  Garvey, 
D.D.,  Rector  of  St.  Charles’  Seminary, 
Overbrook,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 


Its  statements  are  clear,  its  argu¬ 
ment  forcible,  its  conclusions  logical, 
and  its  quotations  extremely  valuable. 
—The  Very  Rev.  Daniel  I.  McDer¬ 
mott,  D.D.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

I  have  read  “  Religion  and  Moral¬ 
ity  ”  with  great  interest,  and  I  am  con¬ 
vinced  that  its  wide  circulation  would 
result  in  great  good  for  the  cause  it  so 
ably  defends. — The  Rev.  Hugh  T. 
Henry,  Litt  D.,  President  Roman 
Catholic  High  School,  Philadelphia, Pa. 

The  clear,  strong  reasoning  and  the 
array  of  non-Catholic  authorities,  make 
this  pamphlet  a  notable  contribution  to 
the  literature  of  true  education. — '1  he 
Rev.  Philip  R.  McDevitt,  Super¬ 
intendent  Philadelphia  Parish  Schools. 

Your  pamphlet  is  a  marvel. — The 
Right  Rev.  Mgr.  J.  S.  Lynch,  D.D., 
Utica,  N.  Y. 

I  thank  you  for  your  excellent 
pamphlet  on  “  Religion  and  Morality.” 
Send  us  three  hundred  more. — The 
Rhv.  William  F.  McGinnis,  D.D., 
President  I.  C.  T.  Society,  Brooklyn, 
N.  Y. 

The  pamphlet  is  worth  a  library  of 
books  on  the  school  question. — The 
Rev.  P.  J.  McMahon,  Minersville,  Pa. 

I  thank  you  for  having  given  us 
such  a  pamphlet  on  the  school  question. 
—The  Rev.  A.  Meuwese,  Mt.  Carmel, 
Pa. 

Your  articles  on  morality  have  our 
united  support. — Council  618,  K.  of 
C.,  Shenandoah,  Pa. 


Second  edition,  revised  and  enlarged,  now  in  press.  Single  copies,  10  cents  ; 
per  hundred,  $6.00 ;  by  the  thousand,  $55.00 

CHRONICLE  PUBLISHING  CO.  PRESS,  Pottsville,  Pa. 


IMPORTANT! 


A  Companion  to  This  Pamphlet 
Is  Now  in  Press 


The  New  Pamphlet  Answers  Objections 
Raised  by  Catholics  to  Parish  Schools, 
As  This  One  Answers  Objections 
Raised  by  Non-Catholics. 

FIRST  EDITION  NOW  IN  PRESS. 


Price,  ioc.;  $6.00  Per  ioo  Copies, 


Chronicle  Publishing  Co. 

Pottsville,  Pa. 


jFVom  the  Vothtnlle  Saturday  Night  Review,  July  2,  190 1^: 

If  you  are  engaged  in  the  work  of  religious  education, 
then  freely  circulate  this  pamphlet  among  your  people  and 
they'  will  become  better  informed  as  to  the  necessity  of 
religious  education  and  your  burdens  will  be  considerably 
lightened  thereby. 

If  you  contemplate  entering  on  the  work  of  religious 
education,  then  freely  circulate  this  pamphlet  among  your 
people  and  they  will  readily  be  convinced  as  to  the  neces¬ 
sity  of  the  work  you  are  about  to  undertake. 

If  you  are  indifferent  or  opposed  to  religious  educa¬ 
tion,  then  lead  this  pamphlet  and  consider  what  so  many 
men  of  every  denomination,  statesmen  and  collegemen, 
have  said  on  the  subject,  and  doubtless  your  views  may 
undergo  a  very  radical  change. 

If  you  will  not  read  the  pamphlet  for  the  information 
it  contains,  then  read  it  for  pleasure  and  pastime.  It  will 
afford  you  both.  But  read  it,  hand  it  to  your  neighbor, 
and  distribute  them  among  your  people  and  friends,  as  it 
concerns  people  of  every  denomination,  and  every  man 
that  labors  for  a  livelihood  should  read  its  pages. 

This  much  is  certain.  All  concerned  owe  something 
of  gratitude  to  the  person  who  bestowed  so  much  time  and 
labor  in  collecting  and  compiling  into  such  admirable 
form  and  inviting  style  all  these  valuable  quotations, 
which  otherwise  might  have  been  lost  to  the  cause  of 
religious  education. 


Religion  and  Morality 


By  Rev.  Jos.  O'Connell,  Rector  of  St.  Stephen’s 

Church,  Port  Carbon 


From  the1  FottsvUIe.  Fa..  Evening  Chronicle,.  June  Z8',  19V4.J 


We  are  pleased  to  inform  the  read¬ 
ing  public  that,  after  many  unavoida¬ 
ble  delays,  the  pamphlet  on  "Religion 
and  Morality,”  prepared  by  Rev.  Jos. 
J.  O’Connell,  Rector  of  St.  Stephen’s 
church,  Port  Carbon,  Pa.,  is  now 
ready  and  will  be  on  sale  at  The 
Evening  Chronicle  Office  on  and  after 
tomorrow.  This  very  important  con¬ 
tribution  to  the  school  question  should 
receive  careful  consideration  at  the 
hands  of  all  concerned  in  the  work  of 
education. 

The  occasion  of  this  pamphlet,  as 
all  will  remember,  was  a  lecture  on 
morality  delivered  at  Fottsville  on 
Jan.  11,  1904,  before  the  Educational 
Association  of  Schuylkill  county  by 
the  president,  Robert  F.  Ditchburn, 
who  is  also  Principal  of  Public 
Schools  at  Tamaqua.  To  that  lecture 
Father  O’Connell  took  exceptions,  and, 
through  The  Evening  Chronicle,  re¬ 
sponded  thereto  on  Feby.  25.  So 
great  was  the  demand  for  his  able 
article,  that  the  edition  of  The  Chron¬ 
icle  was  soon  exhausted,  and,  in  com¬ 
pliance  to  numerous  requests,  Father 
O’Connell  promised  to  give  the  article 
to  the  public  later  on.  and  in  a  much 
enlarged  condition  and  in  the  form  of 
a  pamphlet. 

The  pamphlet  deserves  careful  con¬ 
sideration  for  more  reasons  than  one. 
Although  prepared  by  a  priest  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  by  one 
who  has  erected  and  most  successfully 
conducts  a  flourishing  school  in  his 
parish  at  Port  Carbon,  yet,  in  his 
pages,  he  does  not  handle  the  question 
from  the  viewpoint  of  the  Catholic 
Church  alone.  But,  on  the  contrary, 
it  would  appear  that  he  is  not  at  a  loss 
to  prove  his  position  from  other  au¬ 
thority  than  the  teaching  of  the 
church  before  whose  altar  he  serves. 
It  would  also  appear  that  for  years  he 
has,  like  the  thrifty  husbandman,  been 
collecting  and  classifying  from  the 
four  points  of  the  compass  all  that  has 
been  said  by  churchmen,  statesmen 
and  collegemen  outside  of  his  own  de¬ 
nomination  in  regard  to  the  necessity 
of  religious  education.  And  now  he 
brings  forth  his  collection  in  battle  ar¬ 
ray,  to  prove  his  position  in  an  argu¬ 
mentative  and  logical  manner.  And 
he  does  so  very  conclusively  and  with 
respect  for  the  sensibilities  of  all  his 
readers.  Unfortunately  it  has  too  of¬ 
ten  happened  in  the  past  that  those 


who  have  treated  the  subject'  witli 
which  Father  O’Connell  deals  have- 
come  out  of  the  conflict  with  wounds,, 
and  did  not  benefit  the  cause  which 
they  endeavored  to  defend.  In  Father 
O’Connell’s  pamphlet  there  is  to  be 
found  neither  bitter  zeal  nor  denom¬ 
inational  feeling.  The  statements  of 
men  of  every  denomination  are  re¬ 
spectfully  presented  and  the  reader  is 
left  to  draw  his  own  conclusions. 
From  Washington  to  Roosevelt,  he 
quotes  nearly  every  man  worthy  of 
note  who  has  spoken  on  the  subject. 

So  moderately  and  charitably  does 
he  treat  his  subject  that  his  work  has 
met  the  approval  of  so  conservative  a 
churchman  and  patriotic  a  citizen  as 
Archbishop  Ryan,  and  all  those  asso¬ 
ciated  with  him  in  conducting  the  af¬ 
fairs  of  the  great  Diocese  of  Philadel¬ 
phia. 

In  the  brief  preface  to  his  work  he 
very  modestly  lays  no  claim  to  origin¬ 
ality  and  reminds  his  readers  that  the 
pamphlet  is  only  “a  compilation.” 
Whilst  the  latter  may  be  true  to  a  cer¬ 
tain  extent,  yet  we  give  him  credit  for 
compiling  the  matter  in  a  most  origin¬ 
al,  inviting  and  pleasing  manner,  the 
most  so,  indeed,  of  any  treatise  on  the 
subject  we  have  yet  read,  and  we 
have  read  quite  a  few. 

He  not  only  deals  with  the  sub¬ 
ject  of  “Religious  Education”  in  a 
very  able  manner,  but  he  also  ably 
refutes  the  statements  of  Professor 
Ditchburn,  who  said  that  “Morality  is 
never  high  among  those  who  trudge 
for  a  living.”  The  refutation  of  that 
statement  should  be  read  carefully  by 
every  working  man  in  the  land.  We 
feel  that  we  are  not  doing  justice  to 
the  pamphlet  when  we  say  that  the 
first  edition  should  have  a  run  of  at 
least  50,000.  This  circulation,  and 
even  a  greater  one,  can  readily  be  at¬ 
tained,  if  those  in  whose  power  it  is  to 
do  so  will  but  place  copies  of  the  pam¬ 
phlet  where  they  will  do  most  good, 
and  thereby  will  they  remove  the 
grossly  erroneous  impressions  that 
have  so  long  prevailed  in  regard  to 
those  who  have  either  supported  or 
defended  religious  education. 

This  can  be  done  because  the  pages 
are  written  for  and  will  be  of  interest 
to  men  of  every  denomination,  and 
even  to  those  who  have  no  religious 
convictions,  as  well  as  to  the  “poor, 
but  honest  working  man.” 


In  Defense  of  Religion  and 
the  Dignity  of  Labor 

OR 

Can  There  Be  True  Morality  Without 
Religion  in  Any  System 
of  Education? 

By  REV.  JOSEPH  J.  O’CONNELL 

RECTOR  ST.  STEPHEN’S  CHURCH 
PORT  CARBON,  PA. 

In  Reply  to 

ROBERT  F*.  DITCHBURN 
Supt.  of  Public  Schools  at  Tamaqua,  Pa.,  and  President  of  the  Edu¬ 
cational  Association  of  Schuylkill  County,  Pa. 


PUBLISHED  BY  CHRONICLE  PUBLISHING  CO. 
Potts ville,  Pa.,  11)05 

Mr.  Ditchburn’s  Lecture  May  be  Found  as  an 
Appendix  to  Tills  Pamphlet 

All  Rights  Reserved  Third  Edition 

Single  Copies  10c.;  $0.00  per  100;  $55.00  per  1,000 


WHAT  “TRUTH”  OF  NAZARETH,  N.  C. 

HAS  TO  SAY  OF 

“RELIGION  AND  MORALITY.” 


Can  There  Be  True  Morality  Without 
Religion  in  any  System  of  Education  ? 
By  Rev.  J.  J.  O’Connell,  Chronicle  Pub¬ 
lishing  Co.,  Pottsville,  Pa. 

This  is  one  of  the  best  resumes  of  matter 
pertaining  to  the  present  school  question  in 
the  United  States — that  is,  the  Catholic  posi¬ 
tion  of  denominational  schools  receiving  sup¬ 
port  for  the  amount  of  secular  education  im¬ 
parted,  and  yet  not  denying  to  children  their 
religious  training  as  is  now  done  under  our 
public  school  system.  This  little  work  is  quite 
a  thesaurus  of  facts  and  arguments  strongly  set 
forth  and  deserves  the  highest  praise.  We 
trust  to  see  it  have  a  large  sale.  Single  Copies 
ioc.;  $6.00  per  ioo.  M.  M. 


r 


PREFACE 


On  account  of  the  numerous  requests  we  have  received  from  men  of 
every  denomination  and  profession  for  copies  of  our  article  on  “Religion- 
and  Morality,”  we  have  felt  encouraged  to  have  it  printed  in  pamphlet 
form,  both  that  we  might  supply  the  demand  and  at  the  same  time  give  to 
the  article  a  “more  permanent  form  and  a  wider  circulation.” 

To  the  objection  that  “this  pamphlet  is  unduly  prolonged”  we  would* 
answer,  that,  since  the  defenders  of  religious  education  have  so  long  been 
misunderstood  and  misrepresented,  we  felt  obliged  to  incorporate  into  theso 
pages  every  published  statement  of  prominent  non-Catholic  and  profes¬ 
sional  men  who  have  raised  their  voices  in  the  defence  of  religious  educa¬ 
tion  for  the  youth  of  our  land.  Very  often  the  non-Catholic  has  imagined 
that  only  the  Roman  Catholics  defended  and  supported  denominational!’ 
schools,  and  by  so  doing  they  were  at  variance  with  American  institutions. 
The  Roman  Catholic  has  very  often  imagined  that  only  those  of  his  belief 
favored  or  were  burdened  with  the  responsibility  of  such  schools.  To 
both,  and  to  all  men,  we  would  respectfully  suggest  that  they  read  care¬ 
fully  the  following  pages  and  they  will  learn  what  the  leading  men  of  every 
denomination  of  our  country  have  to  say  on  the  subject  and  they  may  then 
acknowledge  that  the  pamphlet  is  not  “unduly  prolonged.” 

In  order  that  all  may  be  thoroughly  informed  in  regard  to  the  lecture 
which  called  forth  this  answer  and  pamphlet,  we  take  the  liberty  to  ap¬ 
pend  hereunto  in  Section  8,  Mr.  Ditchburrrs  article  as  printed  in  the  Potts- 
ville. papers  of  January  11,  1904. 

Further,  let  us  say  that  in  this  pamphlet  there  is  no  attempt  at  or 
desire  for  originality.  The  reader  will  readily  perceive  that  it  is  “a  com¬ 
pilation  and  not  a  production.”  Nevertheless,  we  feel  obliged  to  acknow¬ 
ledge  our  deep  gratitude  for  the  many  kind  suggestions  and  assistance  re¬ 
ceived  before,  and  the  many  words  of  approval  and  encouragement  received' 
after,  the  appearance  of  our  article  in  the  Pottsville  “Evening  Chronicle,” 
and  “Saturday  Night  Review”  of  March  11th  and  12th,  1904. 

We  are  especially  grateful  to  our  non-Catholic  neighbors  from  whom  wo 
have  received  scores  of  letters  approving  our  position  in  regard  to  “Relig¬ 
ion  and  Morality.” 


Published 

Cum  Permissu  Superiorum 


■ ) 

% 


How  Men  View  the  Article  on  “Religion  and  Morality” 

_  > 

Holy  Family  Magazine  says: 

These  articles  -(on  “Religion  and  Morality”)  are  so  forcible  in  argu¬ 
ment,  so  rich  in  quotation,  they  are  so  valuable  to  all  interested  in  this  much 
discussed  aspect  of  the  educational  problem,  that  they  should  be  printed  in 
a  pamphlet,  for  the  double  purpose  of  giving  them  a  more  permanent  form 
and  a  wider  circulation.” 

Catholic  Standard  and  Times  Says: 

These  articles  (on  “Religion  and  Morality”)  are  remarkable  for  their 
tren cheat  logic  as  well  as  their  persuasive  and  reasonable  tone.  We  hope  to 
be  able  to  give  a  fuller  idea  of  their  style  and  treatment  in  a  future  issue.” 

The  following  are  samples  of  the  many  letters  received  on  the  subject: 


“Rev.  Joseph  J.  O’Connell,  Catholic 

Church,  Port  Carbon: 

“Dear  Sir: — I  am  not  a  member  of 
your  church  and  never  will  be.  I  do 
not  see  the  necessity  of  parish  schools, 
but  I  am  not  opposed  to  them.  I  am 
democratic  enough  to  let  my  neighbors 
nurse  any  set  ideas  they  may  have,  so 
long  as  they  do  not  interfere  with  my 
personal  rights  and  liberties. 

“I  will  not  throw  stones  at  any  man 
or  men,  because  in  so  doing  I  would 
only  invite  him  to  hurl  back  rocks  at 
me.  This  is  a  free  country  for  the 
press  and  for  religion,  and  I  believe 
that  any  religion  is  better  than  none 
at  all.  The  people  who  make  the  sac¬ 
rifices  that  you  and  your  people  make 
for  religion  and  education  are  to  be 
admired  and  not  suspected. 

"Every  one  I  met  admired  and 
spoke  in  the  highest  terms  of  all  you 
said,  and  here  is  my  view  of  it:  I  am 
a  G.  A.  R.  man.  I  have  led  and  fol¬ 
lowed  the  flag  in  battle.  In  calculating 
our  victories  we  always  considered 
our  own  losses  as  well  as  the  enemies* 
losses.  A  thousand  lost  on  each  side 
did  not  constitute  a  victory  for  us;  but 
if  the  enemy  lost  a  thousand  and  we 
lost  two  hundred,  that  was  our  victory. 
But  your  victory  was  a  clean  one.  You 
entered  the  enemies’  camp;  you  took 
their  own  men;  then  you  arrayed  them 
against  their  own  cause;  you  charged, 
silenced  their  guns,  slaughtered  them 
with  their  own  weapons;  you  did  not 
lose  a  man  and  you  marched  off  with 
colors  flying  and  without  a  scar.  I 
admire  such  generalship.  They  may 
follow  up  your  rear  guard  and  endeav¬ 
or  to  get  a  shot  at  you,  but  my  experi¬ 
ence  in  warfare  has  taught  me  that 
they  ought  first  to  have  their  plans 
well  laid  for  retreat. 

“I  for  one  will  be  happy  to  read  any¬ 
thing  more  you  may  have  to  say  on 
that  great  subject.  R.  H.  S. 

“Pottsville,  March  6,  1904.” 


“Port  Carbon,  Pa.,  March  22,  19  04. 

“Rev.  Mr.  O’Connell: — As  so  many 
people  are  expressing  their  opinion  o£ 
your  valuable  article  on  ‘Religion  and! 
Morality,’  let  me  tell  you  the  views  of 
several  in  your  own  town  and  not  of 
your  persuasion.  They  look  on  it  as 
being  not  only  a  revelation  but  also  an 
education.  I  have  met  few  persons* 
either  of  your  church  or  otherwise, 
who  had  the  slightest,  no,  not  even  the 
faintest,  knowledge  of  such  facts  and 
convictions  as  were  found  in  your  lucid 
document  of  February  26,  in  The 
Evening  Chronicle. 

"That  men  of  every  denomination 
should  speak  as  you  reported  them  l 
could  not  be  convinced,  nor  would  I 
believe  it  from  your  pen,  had  you  not 
given  their  names,  and  when  and 
where  they  made  those  remarks, 
There  are  very  few,  if  any,  in  oue 
town  who  knew  to  what  extent  private 
schools  were  encouraged  and  sup¬ 
ported  by  those  outside  the  Catholi« 
Church. 

"It  has  remained  for  your  reverenea 
to  give  us  all  such  proofs  of  that  fact 
as  are  beyond  doubt  and  are  a  sur¬ 
prise  and  an  education. 

"Anxiously  awaiting  your  article  in. 
pamphlet  form,  I  remain  your  fellow 
citizen. 

"ONE  OF  MANY.” 


CONTENTS 


t — Standard  of  Morality . 

2 —  Morality  the  Basis  of  Society . 

3 —  Wjlio  Are  the  Opponents  of  Public  Schools.  .  . 

Statistics  . . 

Churchmen  Si»eak  . 

What  Newspaper  Editors  Say . 

College  Presidents  . 

Prominent  Individuals  . 

I 

Church  Papers  . 

Marcus  A.  Hanna . . 

William  II.  Taft  ; . 

1  ^ 

Non-Catholic  Ministers  . 

Daniel  Webster  . . 

% 

i  President  Roosevelt . 

George  Washington  . . . . 

Most  Rev.  1*.  J.  Ryan,  LL.D . 

4 —  Mr.  Ritchburn’s  Prison  Statistics . 

4— A  General  Review  . 

Is  the  Working  Man  a  Moral  Man? 

♦-—A  Bit  of  History  of  Education . 

T — Mr.  Ditchburn’s  Article  In  Pottsville  Papers 
•-—Something  Better . . 


1-  » 
9-11 
1 1-12 

12- 13 

13- 17 
17-19 

19- 20 

20- 23 
23-25 

25 

26 

27- 2* 
28 

28 

28 

28- 30 
30-34 
34-40 

40-40 

46-50 

51-52 


/ 


Can  There  be  True 

Morality  Without  Religion? 


Beware 

Of  entrance  to  a  quarrel;  but,  being  in, 

Bear  it,  that  the  opposer  may  beware  of  thee. — Shakespeare. 

“Thou  comest  in  so  questionable  a  shape, 

I’ll  cross  thee  though  thou  blast  me.”  — Hamlet  to  the  Ghost 


To  the  Editor  of  The  Evening  Chron¬ 
icle: 

Dear  Sir: — In  your  paper  of  Janu¬ 
ary  11,  there  appeared  a  lecture  of 
Mr.  Robert  F.  Ditch  burn,  president  of 
the  Educational  Association  of  Schuyl¬ 
kill  County,  and  superintendent  of  the 
public  schools  of  Tamaqua. 

May  I,  Mr.  Editor,  utter  a  protest 
against  some  of  the  principles  ex¬ 
pressed  in  the  lecture? 

I  ask  this  privilege  not  with  the  in¬ 
tention  of  discussing  the  question  of 
“Morality  in  Public  Schools”  or  in 
private  schools,  or  of  associating  my¬ 
self  with  those  who  are  either  for  or 
against  the  system  of  public  school 
education. 

My  protest  concerns  not  this  school 
system  or  that  school  system,  but 
rather,  the  great  truths  that  are  be¬ 
fore  any  system — the  principles  of 
sound  morality. 

I  write  this  protest  both  as  a  min¬ 
ister  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ  and  as  a 
taxpayer  of  this  county,  who  has  a 
duty  and  a  right  to  condemn  what  he 
considers  the  unsound  moral  teaching 
of  a  public  official  whose  high  calling 
is  the  direction  of  the  young. 

There  are  many  points  in  the  lec¬ 
ture  to  which  I  could  invite  attention, 
but  there  is  only  one  that  1  will  con¬ 
sider  in  the  present  article.  Others 
later  on. 

Mr.  Ditchburn  asks  himself.  “What 
Is  morality?”  In  answering  the  ques¬ 
tion  he  tells  us  that  morality  consists 
of  the  sum  of  human  actions,  and  that 
these  actions  are  the  effect  of  environ¬ 
ment,  and  that  as  all  men  have  not 
and  cannot  have  the  same  environ¬ 
ment.  it  follows  that  each  must  have 
a  system  of  morality  peculiar  to  him¬ 
self. 

If  these  words  have  any  definite 
meaning  it  is  that  there  is  no  fixed,  un- 
•  changeable  standard  of  morality.  This 
would  make  morality  something  sub¬ 
jective.  and  each  one  would  become 
the  judge  of  the  goodness  or  badness 
•of  his  own  actions,  irrespective  of  any 
^objective  principle  or  law.  And,  since 
the  actions  that  constitute  this  moral¬ 
ity  are  the  effect  of  environment 
which  is  different  for  each  one,  and  is 


only  a  circumstance  or  influence  sur¬ 
rounding  our  moral  actions,  it  would 
seem  to  be  vain  to  seek  any  common 
standard  whereby  to  determine  the 
goodness  or  badness  of  any  action. 

Environment  is  necessarily  diversi¬ 
fied  and  always  changing,  and  if  mor¬ 
ality  is  merely  the  effect  or  the  sum  of 
these  actions,  it  would  seem  to  follow 
that  the  morality  resulting  from  them 
would  also  be  different  and  change¬ 
able. 

But  this  destroys  the  very  notion  of 
morality;  for  an  action  is  only  prop¬ 
erly  called  mWal  or  immoral  inso¬ 
much  as  it  approaches  to  or  recedes 
from  some  fixed  principle  or  standard 
of  right  and  wrong. 

If  the  environment,  age,  sex,  or 
condition  of  one  man  is  such  as  to 
make  murder  seem  lawful  to  him  ac¬ 
cording  to  his  own  particular  system, 
then  is  not  he  as  good  and  virtuous  in 
killing  as  another  man  would  be 
whose  own  peculiar  system  of  moral¬ 
ity  led  him  to  respect  the  lives  of  oth¬ 
ers? 

Mr.  Ditchburn,  as  if  vaguely  aware 
of  the  dangerous  absurdities  to  which 
his  theory  would  lead,  asks:  “Can  we 
not  find  a  common  basis,  a  point  of 
agreement,  by'  means  of  which  we 
may  be  able  to  determine  the  right¬ 
ness  or  wrongness,  the  morality  or  the 
immorality  of  an  action?” 

The  answer  that  he  gives  is  this: 
“That  common  basis  is  life  and  all 
that  belongs  to  life.” 

The  answer,  Mr.  Editor,  is  one  of 
those  vague,  general  statements  that 
may,  in  the  mind  of  Mr.  Ditchburn, 
have  some  definite  meaning,  but  to 
others  it  may'"  mean  almost  anything  or 
nothing  and  conveys  no  definite  idea. 

If  every  person  has  a  different  and 
ever  varying  system  of  morality  pecu¬ 
liar  to  himself,  it  seems  difficult  to  im¬ 
agine  any  “common  basis,”  any  “point 
of  agreement,”  byr  which  to  judge  the 
morality  or  immorality'  of  his  actions. 

Evidently  Mr.  Ditchburn  has  read 
something  of  the  theories  of  those  so- 
called  philosophers  who  wish  to  prove 
that;  there  is  no  such  a  thing  as  moral¬ 
ity.  and  that  the  circumstances  of  age. 
sex.  vendition  and  environment  so  de- 


* 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


termine  man’s  actions  that  he  himself 
has  no  re<*l  responsibility  for  his  ac¬ 
tions,  any  more  than  they  may  affect 
the  happiness  or  development  of  the 
human  race. 

It  would  be  difficult  to  conceive  a 
more  erroneous  or  dangerous  doctrine 
than  this;  for  while  such  might  please 
those  who  wish  to  lead  lives  of  unre¬ 
strained  gratification  and  pleasure,  it 
■would  open  the  door  to  every  kind  of 
crime  and  disorder. 

f  Once  let  men  be  convinced  that  the 
rnorality  of  their  conduct  is  deter¬ 
mined  by  their  environment,  or  any 
external  condition  of  age  or  sex,  and 
there  is  an  end  of  all  social  virtue  and 
order. 

Maty  is  not  such  a 
cumstances;  there  is 
changeable  standard 
to  direct  his  actions 
standard  is  the  same 


cir- 

un- 


creature  of 
a  fixed  and 
by  which  he  is 
Moreover  the 
for  all;  it  serves 


for  young  and  old,  juen  and  women, 
for  master  and  slaved 

This  standard  of^morality  may  be 
regarded  as  remote  and  proximate;  the 
remote  is  the  Divine  Essence  of  God, 
who  is  perfect  and  unchangeable;  the 
proximate  standard  is  man’s  human 
nature  considered  in  all  its  relations — 
1.  e.,  in  his  relations  to  God,  to  himself 
and  to  all  other  creatures. 

When  God  made  man  He  indelibly 
stamped  upon  man’s  nature  certain 
principles  and  laws  that  are  fixed  and 
eternal  andvare  common  to  every  hu¬ 
man  being. 

It  is  true  that  these  immutable 
laws  are  capable  of  different  applica¬ 
tion  according  to  the  diversity  of  cir¬ 
cumstances,  and  in  this  sense  a  young 
or  ignora.nt  person  may  be  less  culpa¬ 
ble  in  not  conforming  to  the  moral  law 
thau  an  older  or  more  intelligent  per¬ 
son  would  be;  but  the  standard,  the 
law.  is  the  same  for  all. 

To  show  how  misleading  is  Mr.. 
Ditchburn's  idea  of  morality  let  us 
ask  him,  if  each  one  is  to  be  a  law 
unto  himself  as  regards  morality,  why 
all  this  hue  and  cry  about  the  Mor¬ 
mons?  Why  cite  them  before  a 
“Congressional  Investigating  Commit¬ 
tee"  as  to  their  plurality  of  wives? 
And  yet,  Mr.  Editor,  those  Mormons 
have  asserted,  under  oath,  that  they 
are  living  and  acting  in  accordance 
with  a  revelation  from  Heaven. 

Nevertheless,  the  moral  sense  of  the 
Nation  is  shocked  at  their  lives  and 
their  "-wives, "  and  our  people  refuse  to 
have  any  faith  in  their  “revelation.” 
Yet  their  morality  is  identically  as  Mr. 
Ditchburn  says,  in  accordance  with 
their  “age.  sex  and  environment!” 

Again,  if  each  one  is  to  be  a  law 
unto  himself  what  shall  we  say  of  that 
heaven  boj*n  prayer  which  is  the  es¬ 
sence  of  all  prayer — we  refer  to  the 


“Lord's  Prayer” — wherein  we  say  “Our 
Father  who  art  in  Heaven,  hallowed 
be  Thy  name.  Thy  kingdom  come, 
Thy  Will  Be  Don©  on  earth  as  it  is  in 

Heaven ?” 

And,  again,  how  are  we  to  under¬ 
stand  the  first  and  great  command¬ 
ment;  “Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  thy  whole  soul,  and  with  all 
thy  mind,  and  with  all  thy  strength, 
and  Him  only  shaft  thou  serve,”  and 
the  second  commandment  is  like  unto 
this,  “Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as 
thyself,  for  the  love  of  God.”  Be¬ 
cause,  to  love  man  for  man’s  sake 
would  be  humanitarianism,  but  to  love 
men  for  God’s  sake  is  true  religion  and 
morality,  according  to  the  law  of  God, 
from  whom  came  and  by  -whom  alt 
things  are  ordered,  and  according  to 
whose  Holy  will  and  law  our  actions 
are  right  or  wrong  and  not  according 
to  our  “age,  sex  and  environments. *| 

The  morality  in  which  the  superin¬ 
tendent  of  schools  from  Tamaqua 
glories  is  what  is  known  as  an  inde¬ 
pendent  morality.  That  is,  a  morality 
or  code  of  morals  that  is  separated 
froYn  and  independent  of  the  Law- 
Giver.  But  it  is  impious  to  attempt  to> 
account  for  right  and  wrong  without 
reference  to  God,  the  Giver  of  the  law 
which  has  made  an  act  lawful  or  un¬ 
lawful.  The  object  of  independent 
morality  is  to  abolish  Christianity  and 
the  Law-Giver,  and  to  judge  a  .human 
act  by  the  dictates  of  reason.  (An  act 
is  good  morally  when  in  accordance 
with  right  reason.  But  reason  to  be 
right  reason  must  be  determined  by 
the  law  of  the  Creator  who  gave  us 
that  reason,  and  not  by  environments 
or  age  or  sex.  For  man’s  moral  ac¬ 
tions  must  ultimately  relate  to  God. 
Thus  environments  only  influence%  our 
actions,  by  no  means  cause  them.] 

The  Superintendent’s  morality  w'buld 
amount  to  this:  Teach  children  of 
right  and  wrong,  but  say  nothing 
about  God,  nothing  about  the  Law- 
Giver,  nothing  about  Christ  the 
Saviour.  But  such  teaching  is  un¬ 
christian. 

We,  therefore,  assert  that  indepen¬ 
dent  and  self-constituted  morality 
without  God  for  school  children  is  im¬ 
piety  bordering  on  rank  infidelity. 

It  seems  absurd  for  Mr.  Ditchburn 
to  speak  of  “higher”  or  “lower”  mor¬ 
ality  after  making  morality  a  thing 
that  is  not  fixed  or  determined.  “High¬ 
er”  and  “lower”  are  relative  words, 
and  presuppose  some  common  and  de¬ 
termined  standard  of  comparison,  and 
if  morality  can  be  higher  or  lower,  it 
is  so  in  proportion  as  it  approaches 
towards  or  recedes  from  a  certain 
fixed  standard. 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


9 


In  concluding  this  article,  Mr.  Edi¬ 
tor,  I  need  hardly  state,  and  with  re¬ 
gret,  that  this  lecture  which  was  re¬ 
ceived  so  favorably,  indicates  how 
vague,  erroneous  and  unsettled  in  the 
minds  of  many  teachers  is  the  know¬ 
ledge  of  the  right  principles  of  mor¬ 
ality. 

Moreover,  this  article  and  any 
articles  that  may  follow  are  not  writ¬ 


ten,  as  said  above,  for  the  purpose  of 
entering  into  controversy  with  any 
person  or  society.  They  are  written 
for  the  reading  public  who  have  read 
Mr.  Ditchburn’s  article  on  morality, 
in  order  that  the  same  public  may 
know  that  there  is  a  higher  and  a 
more  sacred  standard  of  morality  than 
that  which  Mr.  Ditchburn  has  pre¬ 
sented  in  his  article  of  January  11, 
1904. 


2 — Morality  the  Basis  of  Society 


From  “The  Genius  of  Christianity” 
vv’e  learn  that  morality  is  the  basis  of 
society,  but  religion  is  the  foundation 
on  which  morality  rests  or  the  spring 
from  which  it  flows.  Therefore,  if 
you  destroy  or  remove  religion  you  do 
away  with  true  morality^ 

{  This  statement  is  no  philosophical 
quibble,  nor  is  it  a  theological  distinc¬ 
tion  to  mislead  the  unwary.  But  it  is 
an  eternal  fact.  For  if  man  were  only 
a  material  being  there  would  be 
neither  vice  nor  virtue,  and  morality 
would  be  a  reproach  to  him.  Our 
changeable  laws  cannot  serve  as  a 
foundation  for  morality,  because 
morality  is  unchangeable.  Morality, 
therefore,  must  rest  on  something 
more  permanent  than  transitory 
things,  which  are  not  an  absolute 
guarantee  of  reward  or  punishment 
for  good  or  evil.  Now,  that  founda¬ 
tion  for  morality  or  spring  from  which 
it  flows  can  be  no  other  than  relig¬ 
ion.  Common  sense  will  convince  any 
thoughtful  man  of  this  fact.  For.  if 
every  man  according  to  his  environ¬ 
ment  or  time  of  life,  as  Mr.  Ditchburn 
tells  us,  has  his  own  peculiar  code  of 
morals,  then  why  are  all  the  ministers 
preaching  the  ^Morality  of  the  New 
Dispensation  *>) 

If  we  accept  revealed  religion  we 
look  to  God  as  our  beginning  and  our 
end,  who  will  reward  or  punish  us  for 
our  actions  as  they  are  in  conformity 
or  non-conformity  with  the  moral  law 
that  He  has  given  to  us.  Hence  it  is 
that  from  this  faith  in  God’s  eternal 
nature,  and  an  undying  hope  of  reward 
that  will  be  eternal  or  punishment 
eternal,  we  are  impelled  or  led  to  the 
performance  of  our  moral  actions. 
Some  have  imagined  that  religion 
'"'-arose  from  morality,  whereas  mor¬ 
ality  springs  from  religion,  since  it  is 
certain,  as  has  been  shown,  that  mor¬ 
als  cannot  have  their  principle  in  phys¬ 
ical  man,  and  we  know  from  history 
that  as  soon  as  man  casts  off  the  no¬ 
tion  or  idea  of  a  God,  he  rushes  into 
every  excess  and  cannot  be  restrained 
by  laws,  nor  prisons,  nor  even  the 


threat  of  certain  death.  Hence  it  was, 
convinced  of  this  fact,  the  immortal 
Washington  said  in  his  Farewell  Ad¬ 
dress:  “Let  us  with  caution  indulge 
the  supposition  that  morality:  can  be 
maintained  without  religion.”) 

The  ancients,  though  wonderful  was 
their  progress  in  the  arts  and  sciences, 
in  music  and  sculpture,  and  poetry, 
and  astronomy,  and  to  which  fact  I 
respectfully  call  the  attention  of  the 
learned  professor  from  Tamaqua,  were 
without  the  conviction  of  eternal  re¬ 
ward  and  eternal  punishment,  and  we 
know  full  well  how  they  rushed  into 
every  excess  known  to  human  passion. 
Andrwe  find  in  our  own  day  that  those 
whoxave  cast,  off  the  restraining  in¬ 
fluences  of  religion,  which  would  de¬ 
termine  their  moral  conduct,  are  rush¬ 
ing  into  the  adoration  of  their  passion 
in  the  most  revolting  form,  and  every¬ 
thing  that  is  in  opposition  to  the  moral 
law.  ) 

The  great  Washington — we  might 
almost  say,  in  this  particular  instance, 
the  inspired,  but  certainly  the  relig¬ 
ious  Washington — was  fully  convinced 
of  this  fact  when  he  spoke  that  part 
of  his  Farewell  Address  which  I  take 
the  liberty  to  quote  in  full: 

“Of  all  the  dispositions  and  habits 
which  lead  to  political  prosperity,  re¬ 
ligion  and  morality  are  indispensible 
supports.  In  vain  would  that  man 
claim  the  tribute  of  patriotism  who 
should  labor  to  subvert  these  great  pil¬ 
lars  of  human  happiness,  these  firm¬ 
est  props  of  the  duties  of  men  and  cit¬ 
izens.  The  mere  politician,  equally 
with  the  pious  man,  ought  to  respect 
and  cherish  them.  A  volume  could 
not  trace  all  their  connections  with 
private  and  public  felicity.  Let  it 
simply  be  asked,  where  is  the  security 
for  property,  for  reputation,  for  life, 
if  the  sense  of  religious  obligation  de¬ 
sert  the  oaths,  which  are  the  instru¬ 
ments  of  investigation  in  courts  of 
justice?  And  let  us  with  caution  in¬ 
dulge  the  supposition  that  morality 
can  be  maintained  without  religion. 
Whatever  may  be  conceded  to  the  in- 


10 


IX  DEFENSE  OF  KELIOION 


fiuence  of  refined  education  on  minds 
of  peculiar  structure,  reason  and  expe¬ 
rience,  both  forbid  us  to  expect  that 
national  morality  can  prevail  in  ex¬ 
clusion  of  religious  principles.” 

These  sacred  words  are  respectfully 
submitted  to  the  serious  consideration 
of  Mr.  Ditchburn,  and  the  Educational 
Association  of  Schuylkill  county. 

Now,  if  we  as  Christian  men  ac¬ 
knowledge  that  revealed  religion  (and 
I  do  not  refer  to  any  particular  sect 
or  denomination  of  the  Christian  Dis¬ 
pensation)  is  the  support  for  morals, 
how  can  we  expect  true  Christian 
morals  to  exist  in  the  heart,  in 
the  home,  in  the  institution,  public  or 
;private,  where  religion  is  not  only  not 
taught,  but  positively  ignored  by  the 
infidelity  of  the  individual  or  prohib¬ 
ited  by  State  laws?  But  you  immedi¬ 
ately  ask  me:  '‘Would  you  then  say 
that  such  institutions  are  ungodly,  im¬ 
moral  and  irreligious?”  No,  dear 
reader,  the  terms  are  tod  harsh  to  be 
■addressed  to  your  refined  ears,  and  no 
cause  can  be  properly  presented  by 
the  use  of  harsh  terms.  Now,  if  the 
■  State  very  wisely  prohibits  the  teach¬ 
ing  by  the  State  of  any  religion  what¬ 
ever  in  our  public  institutions  it  does 
not  follow  that  the  Christian  gentle¬ 
men  engaged  in  those  institutions  are 
employed  in  teaching  irreligion  or  im¬ 
morality. 

Such  institutions  may  be  called,  neg¬ 
atively,  non-religious,  nor  in  the  sense 
that  they  deny  religion,  but  because  of 
the  absence  of  religious  teaching.  Nor, 
again,  are  they  positively  irreligious 
in  the  sense  that  they  teach  what  is 
opposed  to  religion,  unless  the  servants 
or  agents  of  the  State  abuse  their  po¬ 
sition  and  violate  the  State  law.  For 
example,  I  feel  that  1  do  not  hazard 
anything  when  I  say  that  if  Mr.  Ditch- 
burn  were  to  teach  in  the  public 
; schools  of  Tamaqua  his  idea  of  moral¬ 
ity  as  set  forth  in  the  press  article  of 
Jan.  11,  1904,  there  are  thousands  of 
his  fellow  citizens  of  every  denomina¬ 
tion  who  would  accuse  him  of  abusing 
the  confidence  of  the  taxpayers,  vio¬ 
lating  the  law  of  the  State  in  word  and 
spirit,  and  teaching  irreligion.  Nor. 
again,  would  I  say  that  the  youth  of 
our  county  who  attend  the  public 
schools  are  immoral  and  ungodly; 
for  thousands  of  them  are  the  off¬ 
spring  of  God-fearing,  church -going, 
religious,  Christian  parents,  who  in¬ 
struct  their  children  in  everything 
good,  so  far  as  time  and  ability  will 
permit.  “Nor  am  I  unmindful  of  the 
moral  forces  that  are  at  w'ork  in  the 
public  schools  of  our  land.  I  freely 
xdmit  that  there  is  a  power  for  good 
in  the  example  of  upright  and  high- 
minded  teachers.” 


“I  grant  the  humanizing  effect  of 
study  of  good  literature,  art,  music, 
mathematics — in  fact,  every  branch 
taught.  But  what  is  all  this  in  the 
face  of  the  difficult  task  of  turning  the 
free  will  of  human  beings  so  perma¬ 
nently  toward  the  right  that  they  will 
steadfastly  pursue  it,  in  spite  of  the 
forces,  within  and  without,  which  im¬ 
pel  them  toward  evil?” 

“Surely  anyone  who  knows  human 
nature  will  deny  that  those  refining 
influences  of  the  class-room  are  suffi¬ 
cient,  of  themselves,  to  give  this  direc¬ 
tion  to  human  life.  Every  man  who 
carefully  follows  the  present  day 
thought,  which  to  a  great  extent  rep¬ 
resents  the  intelligence  of  the  nation” 
— as  I  shall  show  in  a  separate  article 
— must  acknowledge  that  the  defects 
which  are  pointed  out,  from  time  to 
time,  in  the  public  school  system,  are 
not  the  fanciful  creations  and  mere 
speculative  objections  of  men  who  are 
“defamers  of  the  public  school,  croaks, 
and  birds  of  ill-omen.” 

Mr.  Ditchburn  tells  us  in  his  article 
that  “according  to  the  laws  of  the 
State  education  begins  at  the  age  of 
six.  but  according  to  the  laws  of  Great 
Jehovah  it  begins  with  the  first 
breath  the  child  draw's.”  Here  we 
agree  with  him  for  once,  but  we  say 
the  child  is,  not  educated  unless  a 
knowledge  of  the  Great  Jehovah  is 
from  infancy  indelibly  stamped  on  the 
fleshy  tablets  of  the  young  heart 
whilst  it  is  still  capable  of  receiving 
and  sure  to  retain  them. 

The  State  began  by  teaching  the 
head;  it  next  proceeded  to  teach  the 
hand,  but  when  the  heart  shall  have 
been  taught,  then  only  will  the  pupil 
have  been  educated,  and  not  until 
then. 

(  This  the  churches  that  have  schools, 
with  thousands  of  far-seeing  citizens, 
say  is  the  only  true  education.  And 
If  the  churches  erect  schools  at  great 
cost  and  sacrifice  and  teach  their 
children  to  love  God  and  obey  the  laws 
of  the  State,  wdll  Mr.  Ditchburn  say 
they  are  energies  to  public  schools 
for  doing  so?  ) 

The  churches  recognize  that  if,  not¬ 
withstanding  the  efforts  of  all  denom¬ 
inations  to  teach  the  Gospel  to  all 
men,  still  thousands  go  astray,  what 
must  eventually  be  the  result  to  the 
millions,  if  the  law  of  Great  Jehovah 
is  not  taught  from  infancy?  Again. 
Father  Washington,  speak  to  thy 
children  and  say  to  them:  “Whatever 
may  be  conceded  to  the  influence  of 
refined  education  on  minds  of  pecu¬ 
liar  structure,  reason  and  experience 
both  forbid  us  to  expect  that  national 
morality  can  prevail  in  exclusion  of 
religious  principles.”  But,  “the  minds 
of  peculiar  construction”  are  so  few 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


U 


-mmong  the  millions  that  they  become 
the  exception  and  only  emphasize  the 
teaching  and  practice  of  the  churches 
that  support  parish  schools.  The  last 
•  census  has  set  the  leading  minds 
a’thinking  on  account  of  the  spread  of 
Infidelity,  but  the  next  may  impel  them 
to  action.  Let  us  hope  it  may  not  be 
too  late. 

We  say  with  our  Divine  Master: 
"I  am  not  come  to  destroy  but  to 
build  up,”  and  as  progress  is  the  or¬ 
der  of  the  day.  we  say  progress,  and 
■"Excelsior,”  and  God-speed  to  the 
free  institutions  of  our  glorious 
country;  and  perish  the  thought  and 
withered  be  the  hand  that  would  a’m 
word  or  act  to  overthrow  our  schools 
But  with  the  Psalmist  we  also  exclaim: 
"in  vain  doth  man  build  a  house  un¬ 
less  the  Lord  build  with  him:  In 

vain  doth  man  keep  watch  over  his 
city  unless  the  Lord  watch  with  him.” 
vAnd,  again,  our  position  on  the  school 
^question  is  not  that  we  love  our 
schools  the  less  but  that  we  love  our 
God,  His  law  and  morality,  the  more. 
The  Church  teaches  her  children  not 
only:  “Thou  shall  not  kill,”  but  she 

teaches  them,  “Thou  shalt  not  bear 
false  witness  against  thy  neighbor.” 
She  teaches  them  not  only,  “Thou 
Shalt  not  steal,”  but  she  teaches  them, 
"Thou  shalt  not  covet  or  desire  the 
wrongful  possession  of  thy  neigh¬ 
bor’s  property.”  The  Church  teaches 
her  children  not  only  “Thou  sha  t 
love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,”  but 
she  teaches  them  in  the  parable  of 
the  good  Samaritan,  “to  love  all  men 
as  their  brethren  in  Christ  Jesus.” 
She  teaches  them  not  only  "Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord,  thy  God  with  thy 


whole  heart  and  soul  and  mind  and 
strength,  and  His  commandments 
shalt  thou  obey,”  but  she  also  teaches 
them  that,  “civil  law  is  from  God, 
and  that  he  who  resisteth  the  estab¬ 
lished  law  resisteth  the  order  of  God 
and  invites  the  anger  of  God.”  Would 
you  say  this  work  is  “treason  to 
State,  or  enmity  to  State  school?” 
And,  is  that  majority  of  the  Christian 
Church  that  is  doing  so  glorious  a 
work  for  God  and  State  to  be  made 
the  subject  of  covert  scoff  and  sneers 
and  dubbed  “a  bird  of  ill-omen?” 
And  all  this  by  a  man  who  sets  him¬ 
self  up  as  an  expounder  of  morality, 
a  leader  of  youth  and  a  “light  in  Is¬ 
rael.”  Truly  may  we  say  with  Ham¬ 
let:  “Angels  and  ministers  of  grace 
defend  us.”  Without  authority  to 
speak  or  presuming  to  speak  for  any 
denomination  or  society,  whatever,  I 
am  at  liberty  to  say  with  Mr.  John  W. 
Willis  in  the  ‘‘Boston  Review”  of  re¬ 
cent  date:  ClThe  attitude  of  the 
Churches  (that  support  parish 
schools)  may  be  summarized  thus: 
Christians  must  insist  that  Christian¬ 
ity  shall  be  the  fundamental  teach¬ 
ings  of  the  schools.  They  are  not, 
however,  to  oppose  any  secular  school 
system  of  instruction  that  may  be  in¬ 
stituted  by  the  government  under 
which  they  live.  Nor  are  they  to  dis¬ 
courage  or  hamper  its  execution.” 

“The  public  school  system  of  the 
United  States  is  as  much  an  object  of 
regard  to  those  Christian  men  as  is 
the  flag,  the  starry  banner  of  freedom 
and  hope,  to  sustain  which  they  ever 
strive  and  to  which  they  ever  bow  In 
reverence.”] 


3 — Who  Are  the  Opponents  of  the  PubHc  Schools? 


Mr.  Editor: — In  Mr.  Ditchburn’s  ar¬ 
ticle  of  January  11,  last,  we  read  the 
following: 

“It  is  charged  by  half  of  the  Christ¬ 
ian  Church,  and  those  directly  under 
the  influence  of  such,  that  our  schools 
do  not  teach  morality;  that  they  are 
vicious  and  Godless,  wholly  given  up 
to  material  success,  wholly  of  this 
world,  for  if  we  do  not  teach  religious 
doctrine  we  cannot  teach  morality.” 

Nowr,  my  dear  Mr.  Editor,  it  is  right¬ 
ly  acknowledged  today  that  the  great 
majority  of  our  people  get  almost  all 
their  information  from  and  have  their 
•opinions  formed  by  the  press  of  our 
country.  Hence  that  great  body  of 
our  people  who  read  Mr.  Ditchburn’s 
article  have  accepted  his  unqualified 
and  dogmatic  assertions,  and  have  no 
means  at  their1  command  whereby  to 


further  enlighten  themselves  on  the 
subject.  They  have  accepted  hia 
statements  and  since  the  publication 
of  the  article  which  contained  the 
above  quotation  they  are  quietly  ask¬ 
ing  the  following  questions: 

“Why  did  not  the  learned  professor 
from  Tamaqua  mention  by  name  the 
Church  to  which  he  referred?”  Did 
he  mean  “half  of  the  Christian 
Church”  in  the  world  or  in  America? 
Why  did  he  not  mention  the  names  of 
those  men  who  are  under  the  Influ¬ 
ence  of  that  Church?  Many  of  your 
readers  have  said  that  they  might  just¬ 
ly  expect  from  the  learned  professors, 
who  are  “teaching  the  young  idea  how 
to  shoot,”  so  ething  more  precise 
and  specific,  something  more  than  an 
insinuation  on  which  to  form  an  er¬ 
roneous  conclusion  as  to  the  name  of 


'  1  2 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


Die  Church  and  the  names  of  the  men 
whom  Mr.  Ditchburn  calls  “defamers 
of  the  public  schools,  croaks  and  birds 
of  ill-omen.”  Alas,  poor  Yorick! 

Again,  Mr.  Editor,  I  disavow  any  in¬ 
tention  or  desire  to  dissuade  any  per¬ 
son  from  his  fixed  views  on  the  ques¬ 
tion's  being  treated.  But  in  this  par¬ 
ticular  paper  1  propose  to  introduce  to 
your  readers,  as  briefly  and  as  far  as 
found  in  my  old  newspaper  files,  the 
prominent  persons,  lay  and  cle.'ical, 
bf  our  country,  and  out  of  our  coun¬ 
try,  who  have  spoken  on  the  subject 
‘of  “Religion  and  Morality,”  whether 
‘in  or  out  of  our  public  schools.  I 
shall  also  tell  your  readers  when, 
where,  before  whom  and  under  what 
circumstances  those  men  have  spo¬ 
ken. 

As  to  Church  statistics  I  give  them 
as  I  find  them,  but  no  guarantee  of 
their  accuracy. 

Ye  “Defamers  of  Public  Schools” 
speak  for  yourselves! 

Statistics  in  Regard  to  Denomina¬ 
tional  Schools  and  Statements  of 
Public  Men  in  Regard  to  Public 
Schools. 

In  this  paper  we  desire  to  present 
to  the  reading  public  and  to  Mr. 
Ditchburn  in  particular  some  statis¬ 
tics  in  regard  to  parochial  schools. 
We  will  also  present  to  him  state¬ 
ments  of  churchmen  and  statesmen 
in  regard  to  the  necessity  of  religion 
in  all  schools. 


STATISTICS. 

Lutheran  Statistics  on  Parochial 
Schools. 

The  Lutheran  Almanac  for  1  904  in¬ 
forms  us  that  the  Lutheran  Church 
supports  5,244  parochial  schools,  in 
which  are  being  educated  234,175  pu¬ 
pils  in  North  America. 

Episcopalian  Statistics  oil  Parochial 
Schools. 

The  Episcopal  Church  Almanac  for 
1901  informs  us  that  the  Episcopal 
Church  has  10,856  pupils  in  the  pa¬ 
rochial  schools  and  5  36  teachers  in 
North  America. 

The  Friends  or  Quakers,  as  we  all  do 
know,  have  always  taught  their  child¬ 
ren  in  their  own  private  schools. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church  Al¬ 
manac  for  1904  informs  us  that  the 
Catholics  of  North  America  had  at 
that  time  4,000  parochial  schools,  an 
increase  of  143  over  the  previous 
year,  and  attending  those  schools 
were  1,113,031  pupils. 

Now,  according  to  the  Almanacs 
quoted  the  Lutheran  Church  has  1,- 


715,910  members;  the  Episcopal 
Church  has  7  38,9  53;  the  Roman 
Catholics,  1  1,289,210.  The  statistics 
of  “The  Society  of  Friends”  I  have 
not  at  my  command,  and  as  to  their 
numbers  I  refrain  from  guessing,  as 
it  would  appear  Mr.  Ditchburn  did  in 
regard  to  prison  statistics. 

Here,  then,  are  13,744,073  church 
members,  whose  loyalty  to  the  flag  is 
only  second  to  their  loyalty  to  their 
God,  who,  with  part  of  what  they 
earn  by  “trudging  from  early  morn 
until  far  into  the  night,”  erect  and 
support  their  private  or  parochial 
schools.  But  let  me  ask  Mr.  Ditch- 
burn  and  the  members  of  the  Educa¬ 
tional  Association,  who  “unanimously 
applauded  his  article,”  will  you  callJ 
so  many  of  your  fellow-citizen©  and 
co-religionists,  “birds  of  ill-omen  and 
enemies  to  the  public  schools  and 
seeking  for  a  union  of  Church  and 
State?” 

I  acknowledge  there  are  many 
members  in  the  denominations  above 
mentioned  who  do  not,  like  Mr. 
Ditchburn,  .see  the  necessity  of  such- 
schools,  and  dissent  from  the  teach¬ 
ing  of  their  respective  churches  in  re¬ 
gard  to  such  schools.  It  is  not  won¬ 
derful  that  among  the  millions  quoted 
there  should  be  found  many  dissent¬ 
ing  voices. 

In  every  society,  religious  and  secu¬ 
lar,  there  is  difference  of  opinion  in 
regard  to  the  most  trivial  affairs.  We 
had  rather  to  forget  the  very  em¬ 
phatic  difference  of  opinion  that  oc¬ 
curred  at  our  last  County  Institute, 
in  which  the  “Educational  Associa¬ 
tion”  takes  a  prominent  part.  But* 
are  there  not  thousands,  not  of  those 
churches  that  support  schools,  who, 
in  word  and  in  spirit,  approve  of  such 
schools  ? 

'Let  me  now  present  to  the  Educa¬ 
tional  Association,  and  Mr.  Ditchburn 
in  particular,  only  a  few  of  the  pub¬ 
lished  opinions  of  churches  and 
church  men,  editors  and  school  men, 
college  presidents  and  men  of  thought 
throughout  the  land,  on  the  question 
on  religion  and  morality  in  the  public 
schools. 

The  Episcopal. 

The  following  is  taken  from  The 
Literary  Digest,  Vol.  VII  (No.  7  F 
181):  “The  Episcopalians  in  general 
convention  have  passed  the  following 
resolutions:  ‘That  the  Bishops  and 
Clergy  remind  the  people  of  their 
duty  to  support  and  build  up  our  own 
schools  and  colleges,  and  to  make 
education  under  the  auspices  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  superior 
in  all  respects  to  that  which  is  af~ 
forded  in  other  institutions.’  ” 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


13 


The  Lutheran. 

The  Lutheran  Church  in  its  last 
General  Council  held  in  1903,  at  Nor¬ 
ristown,  renewed  its  position  in  re¬ 
gard  to  parish  schools  wherever  pos¬ 
sible,  and  exhorted  pastors,  where 
schools  cannot  be  supported,  to 
gather  the  little  ones,  not  yet  of 
school  age,  into  the  church  or  Sunday 
school-room  every  day,  as  far  as  pos¬ 
sible,  and  to  have  some  young  ladies 
o t  the  parish  to  teach  them  the  Cate¬ 
chism  and  the  first  principles  of  re¬ 
ligion.  This  is  the  substance  of  the 
exhortation  or  resolution,  as  read  in 
“The  Lutheran”  of  some  time  in 
November,  1903,  but  I  cannot  just 
now  lay  my  hand  on  the  paper. 

The  Society  of  Friends. 

I  am  informed  on  good  authority 
that.it  is  a  fundamental  principle  of 
the  Society  of  Friends  that  they  teach 
all  their  own  children  in  their  own 
schools  in  their  religion  and  in  all 
godliness.  This  they  do  very  gener¬ 
ally. 


Roman  Catholic. 

The  position  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  on  the  school  question  is  evi¬ 
dent  from  the  fact  that  she  supports 
4,000  schools  and  had  enrolled  in  1902 
1,113,031  pupils. 

Churchmen  Speak. 

.  Rev.  Hamilton  Schuyler  (Protest¬ 
ant),  of  Bennington,  Vt.,  said  in  his 
baccalaureate  sermon  ifi  that'' city  on 
a  recent  occasion:  ^Education  which 
is  really  valuable  to  the  individual  and 
society  must  consist  in  the  training  of 
the  whole  man.  The  intellect  is  only 
a  part — the  will,  the  conscience,  the 
emotions — in  a  word,  all  that  we  des¬ 
ignate  as  the  moral  and  spiritual  must 
also  receive  appropriate  training  and 
discipline  if  education  is  to  do  its  full 
and  perfect  work,  if  it  is  to  be  a  bless- 
Inig  and  not  a  curse.  *  *  *  When 

learning  had  almost  been  obliterated 
during  the  middle  or  so-called  ‘dark 
ages’  it  was  the  church  (of  that  day) 
Which,  alone,  preserved  literary  tra¬ 
ditions/^)  v 

(Doctor  Rainsford  (Episcopal)  saidj 
orL  February  21,  1899)  at  New  York 
city: (“Not  only  should  the  head  and 
the  hand  be  taught  but  the  soul  as 
well.  We  fall  to  recognize  this  in  our 
schools,  yet  it  is  the  corner-stone  of 
our  liberty.  You  have  got  to  give  re¬ 
ligious  teaching  in  the  schools.  The 
Church  as  she  is  today  cannot  do  it  in 
our  Sunday  Schools.”)) 

(Bishop  Johnson  (Episcopal),  of 
Western  Texas,  on  June  10,  1901:) 

,4,This  inability  of  the  public  schools  of 
our  land  to  teach  any  system  of  mor¬ 
als  is  going  to  lead,  within  a  few 
years,  to  a  struggle,  the  like  of  which 


this  country  lias  never  seen,  and  it 
will  be  with  a  generation  that  believes 
nothing  at  all.^) 

Rev.  Mr.  Montague  Geer  (Episco¬ 
palian)  said,  before  the  “Sons  of  the 
Revolution”  in  New  York  City  in  Sep¬ 
tember,  1901,  when  commenting  on 
the  death  of  our  martyred  President 
McKinley,  among  other  things:  “Our 
Godless  system  of  education  is  a  far 
worse  crime  than  slavery  or  intem¬ 
perance.  If  Jesus  Christ  were  on 
earth  and  should  enter  any  public 
school  house,  the  teacher,  acting  un¬ 
der  instruction,  would  show  Him  the 
door.  Here  is  our  fault,  here  is  our 
sin.”)) 

C  Dr.  Wallace  Radcliffe  (Presbyter¬ 
ian),  said  in  part  at  Washington,  D. 
C.,  October  7,  1900:  “It  is  something 
that  your  children  go  to  school;  it  is 
more  that  they  go  to  a  school  of  your 
own  religious  belief.  Therefore,  we 
summon  you  to  bring  up  your  child¬ 
ren  in  your  own  faith.  Let  us  estab¬ 
lish  schools  and  teach  our  religious 
convictions.’’) 

Rev.  Dr.  E.  T.  Wolf,  professor  at 
Gettysburg  Theological  Seminary,  said 
before  the  Evangelical  Alliance,  as  re¬ 
ported  by  the  Philadelphia  Press  of 
December  4,  1901:  “Every  faculty  ex¬ 
cept  the  highest  and  noblest,  is  exer¬ 
cised  and  invigorated  (in  our  public 
schools);  but  the  crowning  faculty” — 
that  which  is  desig-ned  to  animate  all 
others — -“is  contemptuously  ignored; 
and  unless  its  education  can  be  se¬ 
cured,  our  young  men  and  women  will 
be  graduated  from  our  schools  as 
moral  imbeciles.  This  country  is  fac¬ 
ing  a  grave  social  problem.” 

Rev.  Henry  C.  Minton  (Presbyter¬ 
ian).  Moderator  of  the  General  As¬ 
sembly,  said  at  Philadelphia,  May  19, 
1901:  “The  faith  of  our  sons  and  our 
daughters  is  involved  and  the  king¬ 
dom  of  God  in  this  country  is  in¬ 
volved.  Our  school  system  is  not  an 
organized  skepticism,  but  a  God-for¬ 
gotten  secularism.” 

(  Rev.  Dr.  David  H.  Greer  (Episco¬ 
pal),  said  before  the  General  Episco¬ 
pal  Convention  at  Washington.  D.  C., 
Oct.  22,  1898:  “The  Episcopal 

Church  is  not  satisfied  with  the  pres¬ 
ent  system  of  public  schools,  because 
religion  is  not  taught  in  them.  These 
schools  should  not  only  turn  out  well- 
equipped  young  men  and  women,  but 
Christians  as  well.”  ) 

The  same  Episcopal  Convention  de¬ 
clared:  “Surely  every  Christian  will 
rejoice  to  have  such  religion  given  (in 
our  public  schools)  so  that  our  child¬ 
ren  will  not  grow  up  wholly  irrelig¬ 
ious  and  thus  become  a  menace  to  the 
well-being  of  society.”) 

The  same  Rev.  Montague  Geer  said 
in  the  New  York  Sun,  September  30, 
1903:  “We  are  bringing  up  all  over 


14 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


this  broad  land  a  lusty  set  of  young  pa¬ 
gans  who,  sooner  or  later,  they  or 
their  children,  will  make  havoc  of  our 
institutions.  Lynchers,  labor  agita¬ 
tors  and  lawbreakers  generally  are 
human  guide  posts,  with  arms,  hands 
and  fingers  wide  extended,  and  voices 
at  their  loudest,  pointing  us  to  the 
ruin  which  awaits  society,  if  we  perse¬ 
vere  in  the  road  which  we  are  now 
taking.” 

Said  the  same  Rev.  Mr.  Geer:  ‘‘It 
was  the  Rev.  D.  A.  A.  Hodge,  a  cele¬ 
brated  Presbyterian  divine  and  edu¬ 
cator  of  Princeton  Theological  Semi¬ 
nary,  who  used  there,  none  too  strong, 
words  in  an  article  entitled  Religion 
in  the  Public  Schools:  ‘Under  these 
problems  there  lurks  the  most  tre¬ 
mendous  and  most  imminent  danger 
to  which  the  interests  of  our  people 
will  ever  be  exposed,  in  comparison 
with  which  the  issues  of  slavery  and 
of  intemperance  shrink  into  insignifi¬ 
cance.’  ” 


In  view  of  the  entire  situation  shall 
we  not  all  of  us  who  really  believe  in 
God  give  thanks  to  Him  that  he  has 
preserved  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
in  America  today,  true  to  that  theory 
of  education  upon  which  our  fathers 
founded  the  public  schools  of  this  na¬ 
tion  and  from  which  they  have  been 
so  madly  perverted. 

Rev.  Montague  Geer,  in  New  York 
Sun,  October  25,  1903,  said:  “Nor  is  it 
enough  to  say  that  the  Church  and 
the  home  must  attend  to  the  religious 
instruction  of  the  young,  because,  in 
their  influence  over  children  both 
Church  and  home  are  being  weakened 
and  slowly  undermined  by  our  “mad¬ 
ly  perverted  system  of  secularized 
education.”  Said  he: 

“The  Roman  Catholic  Church  is 
\vinning  and  holding  the  love  of  her 
children  by  reason  of  her  great  sac¬ 
rifices  for  their  moral  and  religious, 
as  well  as  for  their  mental  training.” 

Rev.  Robt.  Ellis  Thompson,  D.  D., 
president  Central  Public  High  School, 
Philadelphia: 

“As  to  the  sufficiency  of  religious 
instruction  in  church  and  Sunday 
school,  we  reply  that  one  of  the  first 
practical  dangers  of  society  is  that  the 
greatest  truths  that  bear  on  human 
life  shall  come  to  be  identified  in  the  fj 
public  mind  with  Sundays,  churches 
and  Sunday  school. 

“We  certainly  are  helping  that 
when  we  provide  that  the  most 
aroused  activities  of  a  boy’s  mind  shall 
be  divorced  from  those  truths,  and 
that  the  subject  of  science,  literature 
and  history,  with  which  church  an<f\ 
Sunday  school  cannot  deal,  shall  be  i 
taught  with  a  studied  absence  of  ref¬ 
erence  to  ‘the  Divine  intelligence  at 
the  heart  of  things.’  What  is  this  but 
a  lesson  in  the  practical  atheism  that 


shuts  God  out  of  all  but  certain  select- 
ed  parts  of  life,  with  which  the  young 
man  may  have  as  little  to  do  as  he  - 
pleases. 

“What  would  be  the  effect  upon  a. 
child’s  mind  of  excluding  studiously 
all  mention  of  his  earthly  father  from 
his  work  or  play  for  five  or  six  days  - 
of  the  week,  of  treating  all  his  be¬ 
longings  and  relations  without  refer-  • 
ence  to  the  parents  to  whom  he  owes 
them,  and  permitting  such  reference 
only  on  stated  times  when  they  are- 
declared  in  order? 

“But  the  monstrosity  and  the  mis¬ 
chievousness  of  such  an  arrangement 
would  be  as  nothing  to  the  scholastic 
taboo  of  the  living  God,  to  whom  the 
child  owes  every  breath  of  its  daily 
life,  who  lies  about  it  as  a  great  flood 
of-light  and  life,  seeking  to  enter  and? 
possess  its  spirit  with  righteousness, 
and  its  body  with  earthly  food,  in  pro¬ 
viding  ‘food  convenient  for  it.’  ” 

An  Australian  Protestant  Bishop  on 
the  Secular  School. 

An  article  by  Right  Rev.  George  H.  . 
Frodsham,  who  is  the  Protestant  bish¬ 
op  of  North  Queensland,  in  the  “Nine¬ 
teenth  Century  and  After,”  pleads  for 
religious  teaching  in  the  public 
schools  of  that  Australian  State.  These 
schools  are  now  thoroughly  secular, 
the  acts  secularizing  education  having 
been  passed  in  the  decade  commenc¬ 
ing  1870.  Says  Bishop  Frodsham: 

“In  the  first  flush  of  victory  the  ex¬ 
ponents  of  secularism  logically  ex¬ 
cluded  everything  that  might  be  con¬ 
sidered  to  trench  upon  the  peculiar 
w  ork  of  the  churches.  They  were  - 
guilty  even  of  the  vandalism  of  excis¬ 
ing  from  the  late  Mr.  Longfellow’s 
‘Wreck  of  the  Hesperus’  the  verse 
commencing  ‘And  the  maiden  raised 
her  hands  in  prayer.’  ” 

Last  wreek,  at  a  conference  of  the 
Southern  Methodist  Society  at  Alexan¬ 
dria,  Virginia,  the  local  paper  reports 
that  the  Rev.  Dr.  Hammond  urged 
upon  the  conference  the  importance 
of  religious  education.  “Leave  relig¬ 
ion  out  of  education,”  he  declared, 
“and  education  affords  no  basis  of  ' 
Ufa.” 


Statement  of  Kev.  William  Dwyer,  ot  ■ 
-x  Cambi  idgeport,  Mass.,  on  Morality 
in  Public  Schools,  Before  the  Bos¬ 
ton  Educators. 

“It  is  possible,  I  know,  to  make  a . 
theoretical  distinction  between  mor¬ 
ality  and  religion,  and  there  may  be 
some  individuals  made  of  better  clay 
than  their  fellows  who  are  moral 
without  being  religious;  but,  univer¬ 
sally  speaking,  morality  is  practical¬ 
ly  impossible  unless  it  finds  its  mo¬ 
tives  in  religious  truth.  The  attempt?’ 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


to  teach  morality  in  our  schools  inde¬ 
pendently  of  religion  will  inevitably 
end  in  failure.  Not  one  of  the 
methods  which  educators  have  pro¬ 
posed  can  possibly  succeed  as  long-  as 
positive  religious  teaching  is  neg¬ 
lected. 

“Now,  as  the  introduction  of  posi¬ 
tive  religious  teaching  into  the  public 
schools  under  the  present  system  is 
impossible,  it  iB  evident  that  the  de¬ 
fect  which  I  have  tried  to  point  out  is 
radical.  To  the  question,  then,  as  to 
the  means  of  increasing  the  moral 
power  of  the  schools,  I  §  must  answer 
that  nothing  can  be  done  toward  this 
end  that  will  have  any  efficiency  until 
a  radical  change  has  been  made  in 
the  school  system  itself,  a  change 
thaf  will  remove  the  one  obstacle  to 
the  true  cultivation  of  the  moral 
character  of  our  children.  This  may 
involve  more  than  most  Americans 
are  willing  to  permit.  Until  the 
change  is  made,  however,  I  cannot 
see  how  our  public  schools  will  pro¬ 
duce  a  moral  people.) 

“It  is  indeed  a  cheering  sign  that  the 
subject  of  moral  training  in  the 
schools  is  receiving  the  serious  atten¬ 
tion  of  educators  throughout  our 
country.  If  discussed  solely  on  its 
merits,  without  prejudice,  the  prob¬ 
lem  which  the  subject  presents  will 
soon  be  solved  to  the  satisfaction  of 
all  our  people.” 


When  the  Rev.  Wm.  Dwyer  wrote 
the  foregoing  he  did  not  expect  that 
the  subject  of  morality  in  our  public 
.  schools  would  so  soon  become  the 
burning  question  of  the  day,  one  to 
absorb,  not  only  the  attention  of 
Catholics,  but  also  the  serious  con¬ 
sideration  of  non-Catholics  through¬ 
out  the  land. 

Behold  “The  Religious  Educational 
Association,”  which  met  at  Philadel¬ 
phia  on  March  2nd,  1904,  and  was  in 
session  for  three  days.  All  its  labors 
were  devoted  to  endeavoring  to  devise 
means  whereby  religion  might  be 
taught  in  our  schools,  and  their  con¬ 
cluding  resolution  was  to  spend  $20,- 
000  in  1904,  “for  the  agitation  and 
diffusion  of  information”  as  to  the 
necessity  of  the  religious  training  of 
the  child. 

Important  Points  of  the  Session. 

The  most  startling  assertion  made 
during  the  whole  proceedings  was 
made  by  Dr.  Luther  Halsey  Gulick, 
when  he  said  the  modern  world  is 
“intellect  mad.”  If  a  Catholic  di¬ 
vine  had  the  temerity  to  utter  such 
words,  they  would  have  been  used  as 
a  subject  for  many  a  Sunday  sermon, 
In  which  much  would  have  been  said 
about  the  “dark  ages,”  “the  chained 


1 

1  8a* 


Bible”  and  the  intellectual  obscurant¬ 
ism  of  the  hopelessly  belated  Roman 
Catholic  Church. 

The  most  notable  address  was  that 
of  N.  C.  Schaffer,  State  Superinten¬ 
dent  of  Public  Instruction  for  Penna. : 
“I  am  in  favor  of  ruling  out  of  the- 
public  schools  all  teachers  whose  at¬ 
titude  towards  religion  is  either  hos¬ 
tile  or  indifferent;”  this  he  declared 
with  emphasis.  His  advocacy  off" 
teaching  religion  in  the  public  schools 
was  most  pronounced,  and  he  said, 
“he  would  not  send  his  children 
where  they  would  be  under  the  in¬ 
fluence  of  a  teacher  who  was  not  de¬ 
voutly  religious.”  “While  there  are 
some  teachers  whose  religious  and 
moral  character  is  about  them  as  a 
garment  of  light,”  he  continued,  “I 
regret  to  admit  that  the  public 
schools  have  many  teachers  who 
would  not  strike  a  light  anywhere.’*’ 

But,  why  occupy  the  reader’s  valu¬ 
able  time  with  the  proceedings  of  the 
“Religious  Educational  Association  at 
Philadelphia,”  since  the  Educational 
Association  of  Schuylkill  County 
and  their  “Stately  President,”  Mr. 
Ditchburn,  have  boldly  proclaimed, 
“there  is  no  hope  for  the  good  old 
times” — i.  e.,  when  religion  will  be 
taught  in  the  schools.  But  he  has 
told  us  many  things  and  boldly,  which 
we  have  disproved,  and  to  his  dis¬ 
credit,  that  when  he  makes  so  many 
egregious  errors  in  regard  to  the  past 
we  positively  refuse  to  accept  him  as 
“a  prophet  or  the  son  of  a  prophet” 
in  regard  to  things  future. 

But  we  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that, 
when  the  intelligent  American  senti¬ 
ment  is  once  fully  aroused — as  is 
rapidly  coming  to  pass — and  thor¬ 
oughly  recognizes  that  not  only  is  re¬ 
ligion  concerned  but  also  the  welfare 
of  our  country,  such  sentiment  will 
soon  find  a  way  to  teach  morality 
founded  on  religion,  notwithstanding 
what  Mr.  Ditchburn  or  his  applauders 
may  say  to  the  contrary.  A  greater 
evidence  of  that  growing  sentiment 
can  not  be  found  than  the  utterances 
of  the  leading  men  of  our  nation, 
whose  words  and  names  are  found  in 
these  pages. 

Not  only  are  we  encouraged  by 
those  whom  we  have  quoted,  and  by 
the  proceedings  of  “The  Religious 
Educational  Association”  at  Phila- 
dephia  on  March  2,  19  04.  but  we  take 
pleasure  in  presenting  the  advanced 
step  taken  by  Senator  Brackett,  off 
New  York,  when  he  presented  a  bill 
in  the  Legislature  of  that  great  State, 
providing  for  the  teaching  of  religion 
in  the  public  schools,  as  follows,  as 
printed  in  the  Yonkers  (N.  Y.)  Home 
Journal  in  its  issue  of  April  2,  1904: 


16 


IX  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


Public  Morality. 

V  The  ,ss  is  devoting  considerable 
space  to  the  discussion  pro  and  con  of 
■Senator  Brackett’s  bill  providing  for 
instruction  in  the  moral  code  in  our 
public  school.  The  wide  difference  of 
opinion  would  lead  one  to  believe  that 
our  public  educators  do  not  know  just 
wrhere  to  stand  in  the  matter.  One 
authority  says  that  there  must  be 
something  done  in  order  to  stop  the 
rapidly  vanishing  morality  of  the 
young  generation  attending  the  public 
schools,  while  another  disclaims  all 
demands  for  such  a  measure.  This 
only  goes  all  the  further  to  prove  the 
contention  which  the  Catholics  of  the 
State  have  made,  that  the .  public 
school  moneys  are  expended  to  edu¬ 
cate  moral  lepers  and  atheists.  The 
superintendent  of  public  schools  in 
this  city,  says  The  Rochester  Cath¬ 
olic  Citizen,  is  quoted  as  saying 
that  everything  depends  upon  the 
moral  character  of  the  teacher 
and  that  he  has  great  faith  in  the 
teachers  of  the  public  schools.  The 
children  should  also  be  taught  the  Ten 
Commandments  from  suitable  text 
books,  according  to  his  idea.  .1 

With  Senator  Brackett’s  bill  a  law, 
will  the  public  school  not  be  a  reli¬ 
gious  institution?  The  bill  contains 
the  following  section: 

“In  all  schools,  wholly  or  in  part 
supported  by  the  public  money  of  the 
State  or  under  State  control,  and  in  all 
schools  belonging  to  reformatory  insti¬ 
tutions  of  the  State,  instruction  in  the 
principles  of  morality  shall  be  given 
W  thoroughly  as  is  given  instruction  in 
any  branch  of  instruction.  In  these 
schools  all  pupils  shall  receive  instruc¬ 
tion  in  and  shall  be  taught  and  shall 
study  this  subject,  with  suitable  text 
books  in  their  hands,  for  not  less  than 
four  lessons  a  week  for  ten  weeks  or 
more,  dr  its  equivalent,  during  every 
school  year,  and  must  pass  satisfac¬ 
tory  examination  therein,  as  in  other 
studies,  before  proceeding  to  the  next 
year’s  course  of  instruction.  The  lo¬ 
cal  school  authorities  shall  provide 
necessary  facilities  and  definite  time 
and  place  for  instruction  and  for  ex¬ 
amination  in  this  subject  the  same  as 
in  regular  courses  of  study.  The  text 
books  shall  be  graded.” 

This  measure  is  the  outcome  of  pro¬ 
tests  which  have  appeared  from  time 
to  time  in  the  press,  especially  in  the 
city  of  New  York.  With  religion 
taught  in  the  public  schools — such  will 
be  the  case  from  the  wording  of  the 
above  section — what  about  the  pro¬ 
vision  of  the  Constitution  of  the  State 
which  reads: 

“Neither  the  State  nor  any  subdivis¬ 
ion  thereof  shall  use  its  property  or 


credit  or  any  public  money,  or  author¬ 
ize  or  permit  either  to  be  used,  di¬ 
rectly  or  indirectly,  in  aid  or  mainten¬ 
ance,  other  than  for  examination  or 
inspection,  of  any  school  or  institution 
of  learning  w'holly  or  in  part  under  the 
control  or  direction  of  any  religious 
denomination,  or  in  wrhich  any  dom- 
inational  tenet  or  doctrine  is  taught.” 

The  Danger  of  Non-Catholic  Colleges 

A  Protestant  minister,  the  Rev.  A. 
C.  Dixon,  D.  D.,  writing  in  a  Protestant 
contemporary*  says: 

“A  young  man  in  a  New  York  town, 
after  two  years  in  a  college  where 
there  is  a  learned  professor  who  has 
written  theological  books,  informed 
his  mother  that  he  no  longer  believed 
in  her  Bible  or  her  Christ.  He  in¬ 
formed  her  that  three-fourths  of  the 
students  in  the  college  had  been 
turned  from  faith  to  infidelity  by  the 
teachings  of  the  learned  professor, 
whose  personality  was  so  winsome 
that  they  could  hardly  refuse  to  be¬ 
lieve  all  he  said.  In  another  insti¬ 
tution  of  learning  a  reformed  Jew, 
who  flatly  denies  the  deity  of  Christ, 
and  has  not  hesitated  to  slander  the 
Virgin  Mary,  conducts  the  devotional 
services  in  the  chapel  for  a  week.” 

So  it  seems  that  Catholics  are  not 
the  only  ones  who  see  the  danger  of 
entrusting ,  their  young  men  and 
women  to  the  unchristian  influences 
of  the  secular  institutions  of  higher 
learning. 

Bishop  Grant,  of  the  African  M.  E. 
Church,  said  at  the  opening  session  of 
the  Indiana  Conference  on  September 
24,  1903:  “Say  what  we  will,  the 

Catholic  Church  is  wise  in.  providing 
their  own  schools  to  educate  their 
children.  They  tax  themselves  from 
$2  to  $2.25  to  support  these  schools. 
We  must  learn  a  lesson  from  them 
and  build  and  support  our  own 
schools,  thus  seeing  to  the  religious 
training  of  our  children.” 

Rev.  Dr.  John  H.  Burrows,  said  to 
the  Christian  Endeavorers,  at  De¬ 
troit:  “In  France  the  state  schools 
have  proved  a  prodigious  ethical  fail¬ 
ure  because  the  highest  truths  and 
motives  of  action  were  not  inculcated 
in  them.  Criminal  statistics,”  he  ad¬ 
ded,  “in  France  as  well  as  in  America, 
indicate  that  there  is  a  horrible  fail¬ 
ure  somewhere  in  the  education  of 
youth.” 

Catholic  Church. 

“As  far  back  as  1829,  the  Church  in 
the  first  Provincial  Council  of  Balti¬ 
more,  enunciated  her  policy  in  regard 
to  the  need  and  establishment  of 
parish  schools,  w'here  by  the  aid  of 
trained  teachers,  secular,  religious 
and  moral  education  should  go  hand 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


11 


^in  hand  for  the  perfecting  of  heart  and 
mind.  Each  succeeding  Plenary 
-Council,  that  of  185  2,  of  1866  and  of 
1  884.  reaffirmed  and  emphasized  the 
doctrine  of  the  first  Council,  and  each 
has  developed  on  broader  lines  the 
legislation  of  its  predecessors  in  re¬ 
gard  to  this  important  subjact — the 
moral  training  of  the  young./)  There 
is  no  mistaking  the  explicit  and  man¬ 
datory  character  of  the  law  enacted 
by  the  last  Plenary  Council,  that  par¬ 
ish  schools  must  be  everywhere  es¬ 
tablished.’' 

“The  first  Plenary  Council  of  Balti¬ 
more,  consisting  of  Archbishops  and 
Bishops  forming  the  highest  legisla¬ 
tive  body  of  the  Church  in  the  United 
States,  uses  strong  language  to  im¬ 
press  upon  the  Catholic  parents  their 
great  responsibility.  “To  you,  Chris¬ 
tian  parents,”  it  proclaims,  “God  has 
committed  His  children,  whom  He 
permits  you  to  regard  as  yours;  and 
your  natural  affection  towards  them 
must  ever  be  subordinate  to  the  will 
of  Him  from  whom  all  paternity  in 
lieaven  and  in  earth  is  named.” 

“Remember  that  if  for  them  you 
are  the  representatives  of  God,  the 
source  of  their  existence,  you  are  to 
be  for  them  depositories  of  His  au¬ 
thority,  teachers  of  His  law  and 
models,  by  imitating  which  they  may 
be  perfect,  even  as  their  Father  in 
heaven  is  perfect.  You  are  to  watch 
over  the  purity  of  their  faith  and  mor¬ 
als  with  zealous  vigilance,  and  to  in¬ 
still  into  their  young  hearts  princi¬ 
ples  of  virtue  and  perfection.” 

• 

Presbyterian. 

At  a  recent  convention  of  the  Pres- 
•oyterian  Church.  North,  at  Minneapo¬ 
lis,  the  committee  on  school  and  church 
reported  as  follows:  ‘The  Presbyterian 
missionaries  are  engaged  in  the  work 
of  planting  seed  that,  will  spring  up 
Into  Presbyterian  Schools  and  Presby¬ 
terian  Churches.” 

What  the,  Newspaper  Editors  Say. 

“The  Methodist”  writes  editorially, 
as  found  in  the  Literary  Digest,  Vol. 
VII,  No.  7,  P.  181:  “In  our  judgment 
the  denominational  schools  of  the 
land,  as  compared  with  the  purely 
•State  schools,  are,  on  moral  grounds 
incomparably  the  safest.  Our  stale 
Institutions,  as  a  general  thing,  are 
the  hot-beds  of  infidelity  not  less  than 
of  vice.  We  have  said  and  we  thor¬ 
oughly  believe  that  our  Church 
should  invest  $10,000,000  in  the  next 
ten  years  in  denominational  schools. 
Why?  Because  we  believe  that  this 
system  is  the  American  one  and  the 
only  safe  one.” 

“The  Christian  Union,”  as  found  in 
Literary  Digest,  as  above  (Indepen¬ 


dent),  says:  “The  time  has  come  for 
a  vigorous  war  upon  the  popular  no¬ 
tion  that  religion  can  be  excluded 
from  any  system  of  education.  The 
secularization  of  the  public  schools  is 
false  in  psychology.  It  assumes  that 
a  child  can  be  divided  up,  like  a  tene¬ 
ment,  into  different  rooms,  part  de¬ 
veloped  and  part  left  undeveloped. 
This  is  not  true.  It  assumes  that  re¬ 
ligion  is  something  apart  from  life. 
This  assumption  of  religion  is  wholly 
pernicious.” 

“The  Outlook,”  a  prominent  Pro¬ 
testant  journal,  says  editorially: 
Most  of  the  graduates  of  our  schools 
and  colleges  pass  through  a  course  of 
study  in  which  religion  is  ignored. 
Its  place  is  largely  taken  by  philo¬ 
sophy  and  ethics;  the  result  is  that 
the  student  learns  to  know,  think  and 
feel  independently  of  any  recognized 
religious  element.  Religion  which  is  at 
once  the  mainspring  of  life,  is  suffer¬ 
ing  from  a  disaffection  which  arises 
from  the  present  isolation  of  religious 
instruction.” 

“The  Churchman”  (Protestant  Epis¬ 
copal)  says  editorially:  “Of  one  thing 
we  are  sure,  if  w'o  leave  God  and 
Christianity  out  of  the  daily  round  and 
common  task  of  the  school  it  will  be 
the  rare  home  and  exceptional  Sunday 
school  that  will  supply  the  deficiency 
and  the  State  will  suffer  in  its  citizen¬ 
ship.” 

The  Pottsville  Evening  Chronicle, 
of  Oct.  17.  1903,  said  in  an  editorial, 
in  part:  “We  believe  that  something 
more  than  is  found  in  text-books 
should  be  taught  the  children  in  our 
public  schools.  Tt  would  be  the  part 
of  wisdom  if  teachers  would  try  to 
impart  to  their  pupils  honesty,  so¬ 
briety,  respect  and  love.  The  greatest 
fault,  of  course,  lies  in  the  fact  that 
our  public  school  system  is  honey¬ 
combed  with  political  manoevurings 
and  corruption.” 

The  New  York  Times  tells  us  that 
“the  school  teachers  of  that  State  w^ere 
obliged  to  contribute  to  a  campaign 
fund  in  1  900.  when  Superintendent 
Skinner,  of  public  schools,  was  out  for 
re-election.  And  the  superintendent 
was  the  treasurer  of  the  fund.”  This 
is  surely  corruption  or  graft  in  public 
schools. 

New  York  Sun,  April  14.  1902: 

“Popular  education  has  everywhere 
been  largely  secularized,  and  that  pro- 
ct  ss  is  still  going  on.  Sunday  schools 
or  other  secondary  influences  can 
scarcely  counteract  the  general  ban¬ 
ishment  of  religion  from  the  training 
of  the  child.”' 

Schooling  is  Not  Always  Education. 

“It  has  been  often  said  of  late 
years,”  says  the  Montana  Catholic, 
“that  of  books  and  book-learning  wfe 


18 


IX  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


have  loo  much;  of  education,  in  its 
truer  sense,  too  little.  Of  book-taught 
idlers,  too  proud  for  honest  labor,  the 
country  has  too  many;  of  educated 
workmen,  willing  to  labor,  and  proud 
of  their  ability,  entirely  too  few.” 

‘‘Biblical  World,”  Oct.,  1902:  “Is 
this  primary  mission  tof  teaching  re¬ 
ligion  and  morality)  being  adequately 
performed  through  the  Sunday  school 
and  the  home?  It  has  been  so  as¬ 
sumed,  but  each  passing  year  shows 
more  clearly  that  this  is  not  the  case. 
Further,  there  is  a  growing  judgment 
of  Christian  people  that  adequate  in¬ 
struction  in  religion  and  morality 
cannot  be  given  in  the  Sunday  school 
and  home  alone.  Since  only  a  limited 
number  of  children  attend  Sunday 
school  or  live  in  homes  where  real  re¬ 
ligion  and  morality  are  found,  it  has 
resulted  that  the  great  majority  of 
children  have  been  growing  up  with¬ 
out  essential  religious  and  ethical  ed¬ 
ucation.” 

Rev.  Dr.  A.  E.  Dunning,  editor  of 
the  Congregationalism  said:  ‘‘There  is 
in  the  public  mind  a  latent  interest  in 
religion  which  does  not  express  itself 
in  the  ordinary  channels  of  church 
life,  nor  respond  to  evangelistic  meet¬ 
ings,  but  which  is  aroused  when  it  is 
addressed  in  the  way  of  popular  in¬ 
struction.” 

From  the  Baptist  Standard:  ‘‘Send 
your  boys  and  girls  to  Christian 
schools.  The  child  is  going  to  be  in¬ 
fluenced  largely  in  its  future  life  by 
its  school  environments.  In  schools 
that  are  not  Christian  the  children 
learn  things  that  are  not  Christian. 
You  owe  it  to  God  and  to  your  child  to 
give  your  child  a  Christian  education. 

How  it  is  Accomplished,  in  the  Ger¬ 
man  Public  Schools. 

How  the  German  people  manage  to 
provide  religious  teaching  for  all  the 
children  without  in  the  least  imperil¬ 
ing  the  foundation  of  the  State-— a 
consummation  which  so  many  Ameri¬ 
cans  consider  impossible — is  well  told 
in  a  recent  article  in  the  “London 
Times.”  Says  the  writer: 

“The  function  of  the  ’Volksschule,’ 
or  people’s  elementary  school,  is  ‘the 
religious,  moral  and  patriotic  training 
of  the  young  by  education  and  teach¬ 
ing,  and  their  instruction  in  the  gen¬ 
eral  knowdedge  and  acquirements 
requisite  for  civil  life.  This  defini¬ 
tion  gives  the  kear  to  the  w'hole  educa¬ 
tional  scheme.  /Character  and  con¬ 
duct  are  the  primary  objects;  then 
love  of  country,  then  such  general 
knowledge  as  will  enable  the  child  to 
take  its  part  in  the  ordered  life  of  the 
community,  whether  as  man  or  wom¬ 
an;  and  after  that,  the  special  knowd¬ 


edge.  Religion,  therefore,  eome* 
lirst,  as  the  indispensible  foundation 
of  morality  and  conduct.  The  logical. 
German  mind  holds  that-Ynorality  can. 
not  be  efficiently  taught  apart  from 
religion,  and,  further,  that  religious 
leaching,  to  be  effective,  must  be  dog¬ 
matic.  For  this  the  law  carefully 
provides.  The  schools  are  denomina¬ 
tional  and  separate  for  Roman  Catho¬ 
lics  and  Evangelicals,  except  where 
there  are  not  enough  ehildien  of  one 
confession  to  form  a  separate  school, 
in  that  case  they  are  mixed  *  *  • 

but  the  children  receive  religious  in¬ 
struction  from  teachers  of  their  own. 
confession.  In  1896  there  were  in 
Prussia  6  80  such  schools,  principally 
in  Posen  and  West  Prussia;  in  a  few 
towns  all  the  schools  are  mixed.  In 
many  towns  there  are  also  separate 
Jewish  schools,  and  occasionally  one 
or  two  of  some  other  sect.  In  all 
cases  they  are  on  a  footing  of  equal¬ 
ity  before  the  State  and  the  law,  which 
ordains  religious  teaching,  but  leaves 
the.  choice  free.” 

Mow  They  Do  It  in  Savannah,  Ga. 

A.  V.  D.  Watterson,  writing  to  the 
“Pittsburg  Observer”  from  South  Car¬ 
olina,  mentions  the  interesting  facl 
that  Savannah  iftts  to  some  extent 
solved  the  school  question.  Savannah 
is  the  only  city  in  the  United  States 
which,  he  says,  has  done  justice  to 
Catholics  by  a  distribution  of  the 
school  fund.  Two  large  schools,  one  of 
twelve  rooms  and  one  of  eight  rooms, 
are  maintained  in  every  respect  out  of 
the  public  school  funds.  There  are 
twrenty-two  lay  teachers,  all  Catholics, 
who  teach  in  these  schools,  giving 
Catholic  instruction  from  8:30  to  9  in 
the  morning,  and  secular  instruction 
during  the  remainder  of  the  day.  This 
system  has  been  in  vogue  for  thirty- 
four  years  and  has  proved  quRe  satis- 
factory.  There  is  an  unwritten  law 
that  no  Catholic  teacher  shall  apply 
for  permission  to  teach  in  any  other 
public  school,  and  non-Catholics  nev¬ 
er  apply  for  the  Catholic  public  school 
positions.  Of  the  school  directors, 
thYee  are  Catholics,  and  the  entire 
number  have  always  acted  with  the 
utmost  harmony,  there  never  having 
arisen  any  serious  difference  of  opin¬ 
ion  since  the  system  was  inaugurated. 

Almost  the  same  system  maintains 
in  England  and  in  Canada,  and  yet  fte 
hear  not  of  dark  lantern  proceedings 
and  star  chamber  sessions  to  save 
those  countries  from  “detainers”  of 
their  schools;  from  “croaks”  and 
“birds  of  ill  omen”  (sic). 

And  shall  wre,  with  all  our  boasted 
progress,  acknowledge  ourselves  un¬ 
equal  to  what  is  happening  every  day 
in  Europe?  Yes,  even  at  our  doors, 
in  Canada. 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


IP 


It  will  not  come  for  some  time,  it 
Is  true,  if  we  turn  our  back  to  God’s 
law  and  say,  “We’ll  have  no  king  but 
Caesar;’’  “I  know  not  the  man.’’  It 
will  be  retarded  only,  if  we  say  with 
the  enemies  of  Christ:  “If  wre  hearken 
to  Jj££his  Man’  the  Romans  will  come 
ary^take  away  our  country.”  Again, 
it  is  useless  for  any  body  of  men  to 
join  with  the  coppersmiths  of  Ephe¬ 
sus  in  making  a  tumult  against  Paul, 
and  saying:  “If  this  man’s  word  pre¬ 
vails,  then  our  craft  is  in  danger  to 
be  set  at  naught,”  and  “Also  the  tem¬ 
ple  of  great  Diana  shall  be  reputed 
for  nothing.” 

Let  us  rather  as  Christian  men  say 
with  the  High  Priest  of  old:  “If  this 
cause  be  of  God,  oppose  it  not,  lest 
you  be  found  opposing  God.”  And 
again,  “The  Kings  of  the  earth  stood 
up,  and  the  princes  assembled  togeth¬ 
er  against  the  Lord  and  against  His 
Christ.” 

But  did  they  prevail,  or  the  “Lord 
or  His  Christ  fail?” 

COLLEGE  PRESIDENTS  SPEAK. 

The  President  of  Harvard  Univer¬ 
sity  is  at  present  reviewing  the  edu¬ 
cational  progress  of  the  Nineteenth 
Century,  and  “The  Lutheran”  of  Jan¬ 
uary  14,  1904,  gives  the  following 
glimpse  in  advance  of  the  progress  he 
is  making.  The  President  of  Har¬ 
vard  says:  “It  is  indisputable  that 
the  country  has  experienced  a  pro¬ 
found  disappointment  in  the  results 
thus  far  obtained  from  a  widely  dif¬ 
fused  popular  education.  We  have 
not  escaped  an  increase  of  crime  and 
insanity.  The  popular  taste  for  im¬ 
moral  and  unwholesome  amusements 
1«  stronger  than  ever.  It  is  well 
enough  for  us  to  say  we  cannot  be  re¬ 
sponsible  for  the  sins  of  the  nation, 
that  the  hopes  of  the  fathers  were 
over- sanguine,  and  that  the  work  of 
the  school  must  be  much  more  limit¬ 
ed  than  the  assumption  described. 
But  even  within  the  limits  which  we  of 
the  schools  assume  to  be  our  field,  our 
own  men  say  we  are  not  efficient.” 

The  correspondent  of  the  “Lu¬ 
theran,”  who  reported  the  above, 
commenting  on  it,  says:  “Does  not 
all  this  mean,  in  brief,  just  what  the 
Church  (Lutheran)  is  always  urging, 
that  education  needs  to  be  supple¬ 
mented  by  religion?  That  spiritual 
culture  can  alone  *ave  America  from 
heathen  vice;” 

Speaking  before  the  Ministers'  In¬ 
stitute  (Unitarian),  of  Worcester, 
Mass..  President  Eliot  said:  “I  tnink 
that  Unitarians  ought  to  take  thought 
for  the  education  of  their  children  as 
Unitarians.  *  *  Hence  the  import¬ 

ance  of  founding  schools  where  Uni¬ 


tarian  children  can  be  taught  to  face 
the  Unitarian  way.” 

President  Eliot,  in  an  article  on 
“Schools”  in  a  late  Atlantic,  says: 
“Incidentally  and  incessantly  they 
ought  to  teach  the  doctrine  that  we 
are  all  members  one  of  another.  For¬ 
tunately  this  can  be  amply  and  forci¬ 
bly  illustrated  by  the  experience  of 
every  household;  *  *  minor  religious 

differences  should  not  be  allowed  to 
prevent  the  teaching  of  these  primary 
principles  to  all  the  children  of  the 
land.” 

Let  the  President  of  Yale  University 
Speak. 

The  following  words  by  Arthur  T. 
Hadley,  LL.  D.,  President  of  Yale 
University,  were  part  of  an  address 
delivered  by  him  on  the  160th  anni- 
versity  of  the  Second  Presbyterian 
Church  of  Philadelphia,  and  never 
before  published  until  found  in  “The 
New  York  Independent”  of  December 
31,  1903.  In  part  he  says:  “There 
are  two  extreme  views  concerning  the 
effects  of  education  on  public  mor¬ 
ality.  One  is  held  by  the  advocates 
of  secular  schools;  the  other  is  held 
by  the  advocates  of  church  schools. 
The  advocates  of  secular  schools  be¬ 
lieve  that  good  teaching  will  of  itseli 
make  good  citizens.  They  hold  thal 
a  large  part  of  our  vice  is  due  to  ig¬ 
norance;  and  that  if  you  remove  the 
ignorance  you  will  do  away  with  the 
vice.  Up  to  a  certain  point  all  this  is 
true.  When  you  teach  a  man  to 
write  you  make  him  less  liable  t<3 
commit  larceny,  but  you  make  him 
much  more  liable  to  commit  forgery, 
When  you  teach  a  man  political  econ¬ 
omy  and  law  you  lessen  the  tempta¬ 
tions  and  opportunities  for  acts  of 
violence;  but  you  do  not  lessen  those 
for  acts  of  fraud.  Few  of  us  who  have 
looked  into  the  statistics  of  education 
and  crime  are  optimistic  enough  to 
deny  that  they  are  quite  disappointing. 
The  improvement  due  to  the  removal 
of  illiteracy  amounts  to  something, 
but  it  doe*  not  amount  to  so  much  as 
we  should  like  to  see.  or  as  was  prom¬ 
ised  by  the  early  advocates  of  our 
public  school  system.  The  opponents 
of  that  system  often  point  to  these  sta¬ 
tistical  results  with  ill-concealed  satis¬ 
faction.  They  say  that  such  conse¬ 
quences  are  just  what  you  might  ex¬ 
pect  from  any  system  of  purely  secular 
education.  They  would  have  the 
training  of  the  intellect  supplement¬ 
ed  by  a  special  system  of  religious 
education,  which  should  teach  the  pu¬ 
pil  to  use  his  knowledge  for  the  ser¬ 
vice  of  God  and  the  benefit  of  his  fel¬ 
low-men.  They  look  with  grave  ap¬ 
prehension  upon  the  spectacle  of  free 
citizens  trained  in  the  knowledge  of 


IX  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


>0 


many  thi.igs.  which  may  prove  of  use 
io  them  individually,  but  not  trained 
■n  those  ideas  of  religion  and  morality 
which  have  been  rightly  regarded  as 
essential  to  the  safety  of  civilized  com¬ 
munities.  I  confess  that  I  share  some 
Df  the  apprehension  of  those  advocates 
r>f  church-schools;  but  I  am  very  far 
from  agreeing  with  them  as  to  the 
propu*  remedy.  1  believe  that  both  in 
school  life  and  in  after  life  the  moral 
training  and  the  secular  training  must 
be  so  interwoven  that  each  becomes 
a  part  of  the  other.” 

The  President  of  Princeton  Speaks. 

Ke  says  in  advocacy  of  the  religious 
idea:  “A  father  may  well  feel  that 

his  son’s  refined  demeanor  would  be 
a  poor  off-set  to  his  loss  of  religious 
faith.” 

President  Hyde,  of  Bowdoin  Col¬ 
lege,  said  before  the  Massachusetts 
Teachers'  Association  of  Boston,  Nov., 
1896; 

'‘The  public  schools  must  do  more 
than  it  has  been  doing  if  it  is  to  be 
a  real  educator  of  youth  and  an  ef¬ 
fective  supporter  of  the  State.  It 
puts  the  pen  of  knowledge  in  the 
child’s  hand,  but  fails  to  open  the 
treasures  of  wisdom  to  his  heart  and 
mind.” 

Dr.  Butler,  of  Colby  College,  Me., 
Speaks: 

“We  are  beginning  to  see  that  it  is 
as  unscientific  to  ignore  the  moral  and 
religious  element  in  education  as  it 
would  be  to  ignore  the  facts  of  physi¬ 
ology,  hygiene  or  psychology.  Morals 
and  religion  are  just  as  much  a  neces¬ 
sary  part  of  human  life  as  digestion  or 
sleep.  If  you  do  all  else  and  neglect 
the  part  that  has  to  do  with  the  sense 
of  individual  responsibility  to  one’s 
fellow-men  and  to  God,  you  run  im¬ 
mense  risk,  not  only  of  making  all 
else  useless,  but  of  making  it  a.  posi¬ 
tive  menace  to  self  and  society.”) 

(Professor  Brumbaugh,  former  com¬ 
missioner  of  education  to  Porto  Rico, 
said  recently  before  the  Philadelphia 
Mothers’  Club:  “All  persons  are  di¬ 
vided  into  three  classes— immoral, 

moral  and  religious.  The  immoral 

person  lives  below  his  best  thought; 

the  moral  person  lives  up  to  his  best 
thought;  the  religious  person  is  will¬ 
ing  to  accept  a  guide  above  thought. 
Religious  principles  should  be  taught 
in  the  public  schools.  A  child  should 
be  taught  reverence  for  religious 

things  from  his  earliest  period  of  con¬ 
sciousness.”  i 

Dr.  Levi  Seeley,  of  the  State  Normal 
School,  Trenton,  N.  J.,  says:  “The 
more  educators  come  to  realize  that 
there  is  a  philosophy  of  education,  the 


more  profoundly  convinced  are  they 
that  there  is  something  radically  lack¬ 
ing  in  the  American  school  system.” 

The  same  Dr.  Seeley,  said  in  the 
“Educational  Review,”  Feb’y,  1898: 
“A  little  less  than  50  per  cent,  of  all  the 
children  in  our  country  frequent  any 
Sunday  school.  The  meaning  of  these 
figures  is  simply  overwhelming.  More 
than  one-half  the  children  of  this  land 
now  receive  no  religious  education. 
Even  this  feature  does  not  show  all 
the  truth.  It  seems  to  admit  that 
those  who  attend  Sunday  school  are 
receiving  proper  religious  instruction; 
but  everyone  knows  this  cannot  be 
granted.” 


PROMINENT  INDIVIDUAL* 
CITIZENS. 

Hon.  Amasa  Thornton,  of  New  York, 
said  in  the  “North  American  Review” 
for  Jan’y,  1898:  “The  children  and 
youth  of  today  must  be  given  such  in¬ 
struction  in  the  truths  of  the  Bible  and 
Christian  precepts  as  will  prevent 
them  in  mature  years  from  swinging 
from  their  moorings  and  being  swept 
into  the  maelstrom  of  social  and  re¬ 
ligious  depravity,  which  threatens  to 
engulf  the  religion  of  the  future. 
Such  instruction  can  only  be  given  suc¬ 
cessfully  by  an  almost  entire  change 
of  policy  on  the  question  of  religious 
teaching  in  public  schools,  and  the  en¬ 
couragement  of  private  schools  in 
which  sound  religious  teaching  is 
given.” 

Mr.  Frederick  Woodrow  said  in  the 
“Age  of  Steel”  for  October,  1896:  “If 
the  heart  is  not  educated  with  the 
head,  the  conscience  with  the  memory, 
a  knowledge  of  arithmetic  and  skill  in 
penmanship,  (a  knowledge)  of  the 
date  of  the  battle  of  Bunker  Hill,  and 
the  number  of  gallons  of  water  in 
Lake  Michigan,  are  no  guarantee  that 
the  man  will  not  use  his  acquired 
knowledge  in  putting  the  finishing 
touches  to  as  consummate  a  scoundrel 
as  ever  entered  a  prison  cell.” 

On  May  26,  1899,  David  G.  Cope¬ 
land,  who  is  much  interested  in  edu¬ 
cation,  said  at  Washington,  D.  C.: 
“The  present  day  system  of  teaching 
in  our  schools  is  radically  wrong  and 
must  be  injurious  to  the  scholar.  There 
is  no  pointing  upward  to  virtue,  to 
purity,  and  to  God.” 

“The  Federated  Catholic  Societies 
of  America,”  In  convention  at  Detroit, 
in  January,  1904,  declared  their  posi¬ 
tion  on  the  school  question  to  be  as 
follows:  “That  there  shall  be  no  pub¬ 
lic  moneys  paid  out  for  religious  in¬ 
struction  in  any  school.  Let  the  State 
examine  parish  or  private  schools,  and 
if  on  examination  it  is  found  that  they 
are  giving  the  children  an  education 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


w  hich  comes  up  to  the  requirements 
•of  the  State,  then  let  the  State  pay 

*or  it.” 

Mr.  William  Edward  Gardner,  in 
the  “Churchman,”  Feb'y  20th,  1904, 
said:  “I  dare  to  think  that  I  am  one 
a  large  number  who  are  fully  con¬ 
vinced  that  no  power  has  appeared  in 
history,  capable  of  guiding,  stimulat¬ 
ing  and  making  intelligent  personal 
devotion,  that  can  compare  with  the 
pow'er  emanating  from  the  historic 
Jesus  Christ  and  the  resultant  move¬ 
ment — Christianity;  and  the  public  ed¬ 
ucators  can  never  accomplish  their 
greatest  work  until  they  have  faced 
:he  issue  and  satisfied  the  public  mind 
is  to  the  vitality  of  the  phenomena  of 
Christianity  and  its  place  in  the  educa¬ 
tional  system  of  to-day.” 

In  the  Boston  Review,  Sept.  26,  1896, 
We  Read  the  Following: 

“The  disposition  to  malign  the 
Church  and  to  misrepresent  her  doc¬ 
trines  is  a  curious  phenomenon,”  says 
John  W.  Willis,  a  Protestant,  in  a 
newspaper  contribution.  “It  is,  never¬ 
theless,  an  evident  fact.  It  is  often 
boldly  declared  that  the  Catholic 
Church  „is  opposed  to  the  public  school 
system,  which  has  been  established 
(n  the  various  States  of  the  federated 
republic  known  as  the  United  States 
af  America.  No  such  proposition  can 
be  derived  from  the  authoritative 
:eachings  of  the  Church,  from  the  con¬ 
duct  of  her  adherents.  The  Catholic 
Church  in  the  United  States  has  held 
three  plenary  councils.  In  these  coun¬ 
cils  a  great  number  of  decrees  have 
been  registered.  Not  one  of  such  de¬ 
crees  contain  any  condemnation  of  the 
public  school  system  nor  any  declara¬ 
tion  of  a  purpose  to  impair  its  func¬ 
tions  or  restrict  its  ^cope.  No  conven¬ 
tion  of  Catholics— no  Catholic  Con¬ 
gress — has  ever  declared  against  the 
public  school  systemO  In  many  sec¬ 
tions  of  the  United  States  adherents  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  consti¬ 
tute  a  majority  of  the  citizens  called 
upon  to  legislate  with  reference  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  public  schools. 

/  Did  any  one  ever  hear  a  Roman  Cath¬ 
olic  majority  in  a  township,  village  or 
city,  voting  against  appropriations  for 
the  public  schools  or  refusing  to  pro¬ 
vide  suitable^  school  buildings?  Cer¬ 
tainly  not.  The  false  accusation  that 
the  CatholicHjhurch  desires  to  impair 
or  hamper  the  public  system  arises 
from  the  fact — the  simple  fact — that 
the  Catholic  Church  insists  upon  the 
proposition  that  no  system  of  education 
is  complete  that  is  not  essentially 
Christian.  {She  holds  that  the  most  im¬ 
portant  oil-all  knowledge  is  the  science 
of  the  divine,  the  knowledge  of  the 


will  of  God.  Teaching,  as  she  does, 
that  the  existence  of  a  human  being 
commences  in  this  world,  but  never 
ends, (she  has  come  to  the  logical  con¬ 
clusion  that  no  system  of  education  is 
perfect  which  does  not  have  fpr  its 
principal  object  the  preparation  of 
mankind  for  the  larger  life  which  lies 
beyond  the  grave.  According  to  the 
Catholic  faith,  the  grave  is  not  a  blot 
upon  existence,  a  baleful  ending-  to  a 
career,  a  dark  and  dreadful  vale  of 
tears,  but  is  an  open  door  to  a  higher, 
purer,  and  infinitely  grander  existence. 
As  the  portion  of  our  life  which  is 
passed  in  this  world  is  but  a  mere 
fragment  of  life  in  its  totality,  the 
Catholic  Church  believes  that  educa¬ 
tional  systems  should  consult  the  good 
of  the  individual  in  the  immortal  life, 
rather  than  facilitate  merely  the  exer¬ 
cise  of  those  functions  necessary  for 
the  material  good  attainable  in  this 
world. 


\“The  word  ‘educate’  (from  the  Latin 
wore!  educere)  means  to  lead  forth 
into  activity  the  various  faculties  of 
the  human  intellect  and  the  human 
soul.^  The  Catholic  Church  not  only 
teacnes  that  reverence  for  Almighty 
God  is  the  supreme  duty  of  every 
man  and  of  every  woman,  but  seeks 
to  lead  out  from  the  recesses  of  the 
soul,  heart  and  reason,  those  vital 
qualities  which  an  hmnortal  soul  needs 
for  its  exaltation  in  the  coming  life, 
that  grander  life  which  begins  at  the 
point  which  we,  in  our  unthinking  sad¬ 
ness,  call  death. 


“The  Catholic  Church,  therefore,  can 
not  advise  her  people  to  make  use  of 
any  school  system  which  is  not  pre¬ 
eminently  and  distinctively  Christian. 
She.  therefore,  provides  schools  of  her 
own,  and  invites  her  people  to  edu¬ 
cate  their  children  in  such  schools. 
This  does  not  imply  any  hostility  to  a 
school  system  which  is  non-religious. 


“The  writer  has  never  heard  from 
Catholic  ecclesiastics  any  expression 
of  hostility  to  the  public  school  sys¬ 
tem.  On  the  contrary,  the  general 
tone  of  remarks  among  Catholic 
priests  and  laymen  alike,  is  one  of 
congratulation  upon  the  existence  of 
all  agencies  which  tend  to  stimulate 
thought  and  advance  intellectual  de¬ 
velopment.  The  mere  fact  that  the 
Church  can  not  advise  her  people  to 
make  use  of  a  plan  of  intellectual  de¬ 
velopment,  which  is  not  combined  with 
spiritual  teaching,  does  not  forbid  her 
people  to  aid  in  the  upbuilding  and 
expansion  of-  all  instrumentalities 
adapted  to  the  promotion  of  intellect¬ 
ual  culture.” 


*2 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


ANGLICAN  MINISTER  ON  CATH¬ 
OLIC  SCHOOLS. 

Eloquent  ami  Generous  Tribute  Voiced 
at  a  Prize  Distribution. 

t 

From  “Catholic  Standard  and  Times,” 

May  7th,  1904: 

The  following  is  an  extract  from  the 
speech  delivered  by  Rev.  Dr.  Todd,  an 
Anglican  clergyman,  at  the  distribu¬ 
tion  of  prizes  held  in  connection  writh 
the  Sisters  of  Mercy  school,  Midland 
Junction,  Western  Australia.  Bishop 
Gibney  and  Father  Morris  (pastor  of 
Midland  Junction)  were  present.  Dr. 
Todd  took  as  his  subject  “The  Educa¬ 
tion  Given  in  the  Catholic  Schools,” 
and  after  some  preliminary  remarks 
Baid: 

I  am,  like  Moses  of  old,  a  man  of 
slow  speech.  I  hardly  know  where  to 
begin.  I  have  been  asked  to  testify  as 
to  what  I  know  of  the  work  of  the 
Catholic  schools.  It  gives  me  great 
pleasure  to  say  that  I  have  been  a  fre¬ 
quent  and  welcome  visitor  here;  that 
the  reverend  mother  and  Father  Mor¬ 
ris  have  afforded  me  the  fullest,  oppor¬ 
tunities  of  examining  the  children  on 
subjects  taught.  My  testimony  is  that 
the  -work  done  in  the  past  year  is  ex¬ 
cellent. 

I  take  it,  my  Lord  Bishop,  that  you 
founded  this  school — first,  to  give  a 
good  elementary  education  to  Catholic 
children  and  such  non-Catliolic  chil¬ 
dren  as  might  attend.  Your  schools 
are  doing  in  this  direction  a  work  as 
good  as  that,  done  by  the  State  schools. 
From  one  point  of  view  they  are  do¬ 
ing  better  work,  because  they  are  do¬ 
ing  it  without  any  such  generous  sup¬ 
plies  of  apparatus — improved  desks, 
maps,  stationery,  tools,  etc. — as  are 
given  by  the  State  to  its  schools.  And 
In  the  second  place,  I  take  it,  my  Lord 
Bishop,  that  you  founded  these  schools 
to  give  the  children  of  your  church 
sound  instruction  on  the  Catholic 
faith.  I  have  no  doubt  but  that  this 
work  is  as  ably  done  as  the  secular 
work.  I  admire  the  principle,  I  com¬ 
mend  all  who  will  hold  that  the  teach¬ 
ing  of  religion  should  go  hand  in  hand 
with  secular  teaching.  Religion  is  the 
foundation,  the  rule,  the  motive  of 
every  life  which  can  be  called  a  life 
at  all.  Man  has  a  body  and  man  has 
a  mind,  but  man  is  a  spirit,  and  if 
we  neglect  that  life  of  the  spirit,  which 
Is  the  divinest  part,  we  neglect  all  the 
noblest  faculties  which  constitute  the 
dignity  of  man’s  nature. 

Wrongs  Done  to  the  Catholic  Commu¬ 
nity. 

But  because  you,  my  Lordship,  be¬ 
lieve  this,  and  insist  upon  acting  out 


your  belief,  the  State  \vi.i  do  nothing 
for  you,  not  even  give  your  schooir  an 
annual  inspection  to  test  whether  your 
schools  are  as  efficient  as  you  say  they 
are.  Hence  the  following  wrongs  are 
done  to  the  Catholic  community: 

1.  The  initial  cost — purchase  of 
ground,  erection  and  equipment  of 
these  schools — is  thrown  upon  a.  relig¬ 
ious  community  not  the  most  numer¬ 
ous  or  wealthiest  in  the  State. 

2.  The  cost  of  maintenance  of  these 
schools  is  laid  upon  you.  They  are 
doing  good  work  for  the  State.  The 
State,  I  have  always  held,  should  pay 
those  who  do  its  work.  At  the  average 
per  capita  rate  paid  for  children  in  the 
State  schools,  this  school  has  earned 
£800.  Did  the  government  pay  this 
sum,  I  am  sure  we  would  see  an  im¬ 
mense  advance  in  manual  training, 
etc.,  which  cannot  be  begun  for  want 
of  funds. 

3.  Education  is  not  free  to  all  chil¬ 
dren  in  the  State.  Many  boast  that  it 
is,  but  the  boast  must  be  modified  into 
this — “education  is  free  to  all  who  go 
to  the  State  schools;  it  is  not  free  to 
those  who  go  to  the  Catholic  schools.” 
Hence  it  is  no  wonder  that  Catholics 
feel  that  the  old  penal  law  has  fol¬ 
lowed  them  out  to  Western  Australia. 
Further,  the  Catholics  have  not  only 
to  support  their  own  schools,  but,  as 
citizens  paying  taxes,  they  help  to  sup¬ 
port  another  set  of  schools  from  which 
very  few  of  their  children — at  least  in 
the  metropolitan  districts — derive  any 
advantages.  I  have  always  main¬ 
tained  that  the  State  should  subsidize 
the  schools  founded  by  religious  bodies 
if,  in  secular  education,  they  came  up 
to  the  standard  of  merit  laid  down 
by  the  State  for  its  own  schools. 

Not  Prose! y t i zers. 

My  Lord  Bishop,  we  read  now  and 
again  an  appeal  to  the  members  of  the 
“free”  and  other  churches  not  to  send 
their  children  to  your  schools.  I  never 
direct  my  people  to  send  their  children 
to  your  schools.  I  never  direct  my 
people  to  withdraw  their  children  if 
they  go.  The  parents  are  free  citizens. 
It  would  be  an  impertinence  on  my 
part  to  interfere  with  their  right  to 
educate  their  children  how  and  where 
they  please.  I  would,  however,  speed¬ 
ily  become  openly  impertinent  and  in¬ 
terfere  did  I  see  any  effort  made  or 
had  any  apprehensions  of  an  effort  be¬ 
ing  made  to  turn  them  away  from  or 
tamper  with  their  faith.  We  are  told 
that  it  is  on  account  of  that  danger 
thes*»  cries  of  warning  are  raised,  but 
when  it  is  said  that  the  atmosphere  of' 
these  schools  is  too  foetid,  too  unwhole¬ 
some  for  any  Protestant  child,  some 
evidence  to  convince  the  mind  should 
be  presented  to  show  that  the  cry  is. 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


*3 


needed,  that  this  danger  is  real.  Did 
I  think  my  children  attending  this 
school  were  being  tampered  with  in 
regard  to  their  faith,  I  would  leave  no 
•effort  unmade  to  withdraw  them.  An 
ounce  of  fact  is  worth  more  than  tons 
of  outcries. 

I  have  one  family  whose  children  at¬ 
tend  this  school  who  have,  in  fact, 
never  been- to  any  other  but  a  convent 
school.  It  is  a  strange  coincidence,  if 
it  be  nothing  more,  that  this  family 
is  the  only  family  seen  as  a  family  in 
my  church;  yet  tve  Church  of  En¬ 
gland  people  are  taught,  and  we  pro¬ 
fess  to  believe,  that  the  family,  not 
the  individual,  is  the  unit  in  the 
Christian  Church.  All  the  members 
of  this  family  who  have  been  con¬ 
firmed  are  my  most  regular  attend- 
ers  at  Holy  Eucharist;  twro  of  its  mem- 
t>ers  are  teachers  in  my  Sunday  school. 
The  oldest  daughter  has  just  received 
the  appointment  of  organist  in  my 
church.  She  is  still  in  her  teens,  I  be¬ 
lieve.  It  speaks  well  for  the  musical 
education  she  received  here  that  one 
so  young  is  competent  to  fulfill  the  po¬ 
sition  of  organist  in  a  church  like 
mine.  I  do  not  say  this  attention  to 
religious  duties  as  a  family  is  caused 
by  the  attendance  of  the  children  at 
a  Catholic  school — -{hat  would  be  to 
assert  an  absurdity — but  to  prove  that 
the  atmosphere  of  this  school  has  in 
no  way  lowered  their  ideals  of  or  be¬ 
lief  in  the  tenets  of  the  Church  to 
which  they  belong.  There  are  other 
children  of  my  church  at  this  school; 
all  are  in  my  Sunday  school.  In  re¬ 
spectful  behavior  there,  reverence  to 
their  spiritual  pastor,  they  are  good 
examples  to  their  fellow-scholars.  Of 
all  our  university  scholars  of  the 
Church  of  Ireland  who  filled  the  pro¬ 
fessorships  of  mathematics  and  ex¬ 
physics  in  the  Catholic  seminaries  of 
Ireland — Blackrock,  Clongowes,  St. 
Jarlath’s,  the  Sacred  Heart,  etc. — I 
never  heard  of  one  who  found  the  at¬ 
mosphere  unwholesome.  My  only 
brother  filled  one  of  those  posts;  he  is 
today  the  rector  of  Bessbrook. 

Another  Myth. 

Another  myth  that  has  gained 
ground  is  that  ignorance  and  supersti¬ 
tion  are  characteristic  of  all  Catholics, 
and  that  the  Catholic  priesthood  de¬ 
sire  to  retain  these  traits  in  their  peo¬ 
ple.  Why,  then,  did  you  build  these 
schools?  A  paucity  of  university  de¬ 
grees  among  the  members  of  a  Chris¬ 
tian  people  is  no  sign  of  ignorance. 
If  it  were,  then  the  majority  of  the 
•colonial  clergy  of  my  church  are  ig¬ 
norant  men,  and  I  deny  that  they  are. 
Catholics  will  go  to  universities  of  a 
certain  type  only,  and  prefer  to  go 
''Without  university  degrees  than  go  to 


any  other.  The  rising  generation  of 
Catholics  are  not  being  brought  up  in 
ignorance.  The  best  school  in  this 
colony  is  a  Catholic  school — the  Chris¬ 
tian  Brothers’  College  ifi  Perth.  The 
best  school  for  girls'  I  ever  saw,  and  I 
have  seen  schools  the  wide  world  over, 
was  the  King’s  Inn  St.  Convent  School 
in  Dublin;  for  boys,  I  think  Blackrock 
has  no  superior.  Would  to  God  my 
Church  had  one  such  for  boys  and  one 
such  for  girls  in  Perth.  My  Lord  Bish¬ 
op,  I  envy  you  your  schools. 


THE  CHURCH  AND  EDUCATION. 

(Episcopal.) 

The  Churchman,  April  2  3rd,  1904: 
To  the  Editor  of  The  Churchman; 

I  never  pass  one  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church’s  many  institutions 
for  the  education  of  her  childreh 
without  doing  inward  obeisance  to  her 
wisdom  and  faithfulness  in  regard  to 
this  all-important  duty;  or  without  an 
ardent  longing  that  our  own  beloved 
branch  of  the  Church  Catholic  could 
have  her  eyes  opened  to  the  great 
work  that  she  could  and  should  do  in 
the  same  field. 

In  the  public  schools  wre  are  con¬ 
fronted  by  the  problem,  “How  much 
and  what  religion  can  be  taught?” 
The  sacred  beliefs  of  the  Christian 
clash  with  the  heresy  of  the  Jew  and 
the  unbelief  of  the  atheist.  Conse¬ 
quently.  religious  instruction,  or  even 
observances,  have  to  be  done  away 
with  or  reduced  to  the  minimum. 
With  what  results?  We  have  hardly 
begun  to  appreciate  them  yet,  though 
they  are  already  clearly  visible  around 
us. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church  re¬ 
gards  this  state  of  things,  and  makes 
her  protest;  then,  quietly  and  without 
loss  of  time,  goes  to  work  to  do  the 
only  thing  that  is  to  be  done,  erects 
her  own  schools  and  provides  her  own 
educational  equipments.  With  what 
results?  Clearly  are  they,  also,  vis¬ 
ible  in  her  growth  and  ,,5gor.  She 
reaps  abundantly  that  which  she  has 
wisely  sown.  Do  we  need  to  hear 
aerain  the  saying  of  the  wise  man  of 
old:  “Give  me' your  son  till  he  is  ten 
years  old,  and  you  may  have  him  for 
the  rest  of  his  life?” 

Do  we  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  think  it  a  small  matter  that 
the  youth  of  the  Church  or  the  Nation 
be  trained  up  in  schools  in  wrhich  the 
Christian  faith  is  not  taught  as  the 
all-important  element  of  education? 
Or  is  this  the  time  that  religious  in¬ 
struction  in  schools  can  be  safely  done 
away  with,  when  the  demands  of  bus¬ 
iness  and  society  are  making  heavier 
and  heavier  drafts  upon  the  time  of 
the  parents  of  families,  and  the  bur- 


24 


IX  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


den  of  all  instruction,  moral  and  spir¬ 
itual,  as  well  as  mental,  is  being  cast 
more  and  more  on  the  “teacher  and 
master?” 

I  would  have  no  one  think  that  T 
find  fault  with  the  public  schools,  or 
with  their  restrictions  in  regard  to  re¬ 
ligion.  From  the  very  nature  of  the 
case,  I  can  see  710  other  method  for 
them  to  pursue;  nor  would  I  interfere 
wdth  one  of  them.  If  we  cannot  have 
both  spiritual  and  mental  training,  by 
all  means  let  us  take  what  good  things 
■we  car.  have.  Yet  the  thought  of  the 
children  of  the  Nation  trained  up  in 
schools  where  the  Bible  is  not  read, 
where  Christian  hymns  are  not  sung, 
where  they  are  confronted  from  ear¬ 
liest  infancy  with  “I  am  of  Christ,  and 
I  am  of  Moses,  and  I  am  of  no  belief 
at  all — take  your  choice,”  sounds  an 
alarm  for  the  future  “like  a  fire  bell 
rung  in  the  night.” 

Many  Church  schools  we  have  that 
are  doing  good  work,  I  have  no  doubt. 
Yet,  certainly,  there  are  not  a  tithe  of 
what  is  needed;  and  many  of  those 
we  have  are  but  the  spoiadic  efforts 
of  the  individual  to  fall  with  the  indi¬ 
vidual,  What  we  need  is  the  recogni¬ 
tion  that  for  the  use  of  every  parish 
the  w<*ll-equipped  Church  school,  of 
the  Church,  by  the  Church,  and  for 
the  Church,  as  well  as  for  all  outside 
that  desire  it,  is  only  less  necessary 
than  the  well-equipped  church  build¬ 
ing  itself.  Our  missionaries  perceive 
this  need  and  strive  to  meet  it.  In 
almost  all  the  mission  stations  there 
is  an  effort  made  to  establish  the 
school.  Not  less  necessarv.  I  am  sure, 
fs  it  at  home.  E.  D.  WARD. 

1713  Q  street,  NW„  Washington,  D.  C. 


PROTESTANT  WRITER’S  TRIBUTE 

From  “Youth’s  Home  Journal,” 
March  26th,  1904: 

Addressing  the  Newman  Club,  of 
Eos  Angeles,  Cal.,  recently,  Charles  F. 
Eummis,  the  w'ell-known  editor  and 
writer,  who  is  not  a  Catholic,  deliv¬ 
ered  a  ringing  address.  Among 
other  things  he  said:  “The  fact  is 
that  the  Catholic  Church  and  its 
schools  are  the  pioneers  in  Indian 
education  in  America.  It  was  not 
until  1807  that  an  English-speaking 
person  came  to  New  Mexico.  In  1617 
there  were  11  Catholic  churches  in 
New  Mexico,  and  all  had  their  Catho¬ 
lic  Indian  schools.  The  reason  why 
T  am  opposed  to  this  campaign 
(against  Catholic  Indian  schools')  Is 
because  these  are  the  only  schools  I 
know  of  that  are  doing  the  Indians 
lasting  good.  Not  because  of  the  le- 
ligion,  which  is  nothing  to  me,  al¬ 
though  it  is  the  Indians*??  religion  to 
a  great  extent.  I  do  not  believe  that 


one  should  be  taken  from  his  fathers 
faith  or  his  mother’s  laith  for  the- 
vhim  of  a  school  teacher.  I  am  judg¬ 
ing  by  the  long  results.  I  have  not 
known  a  child  from  a  Catholic  school 
who  had  forgotten  his  parents  or  hisr 
language.  I  have  not  known  any  of 
the  girls  that  have  gone  wrong  in  the 
Indian  towns  to  have  come  from  a 
Catholic  school.  Not  one!  But  X 
have  known  a  good  many  from  Car¬ 
lisle  and  other  Government  schools- 
Go  with  me  to  that  exquisitely  neat 
and  motherly  school  of  Sister  Mar¬ 
garet.  at  Bernalilo:  go  with  me  to  the 
Albuquerque  or  to  the  Santa  Fe 
school,  and  then  let.  a  man  of  the- 
world  judge  which  of  those  he  would 
choose  as  a  place  for  his  children.  If 
there  is  any  motherly  heart 
in  the  world,  when  mothers 
and  fathers  are  fled  away,  It  is  the 
Sister  of  Charity.  There  is  something 
unselfish  in  that  work  of  love.  But  T 
have  learned  something  of  experience^ 
In  boyhood  I  thought  they  were  ter¬ 
rible:  but  I  have  seen  them  fFhen  the 
biack  ‘vomito’  raged  in  the  tropics, 
and  mothers  and  fathers  fled  away 
from  their  own  children  and  people 
fell  in  the  streets;  and  those  daugh¬ 
ters  of  God  picking  up  the  deserted 
dead  and  dying.  And  I  have  felt 
their  tender  mercy  myself;  and  when 
a  man  comes  to  me  and  says  that  a 
child — or  a  dog — had  better  be 
taught  by  a  politician  who  is  reward¬ 
ed  by  a  place  in  a  Government  Indian 
school  than  by  a  Sister  of  Charity,  he 
wants  to  bring  his  fire-escape  with 
him,  that’s  all.  And  it  seems  to  me 
that  any  American,  not  to  say  any 
Catholic  American,  could  not  better- 
employ  part  of  his  inoney  than  in  aid¬ 
ing  the  suppoi’t  of  the  Indian  schools- 
conducted  by  these  noble  and  unsel¬ 
fish  women,  7iow  frowned  upon  and 
even  actively  antagonized  by  the  par¬ 
tisan  spirit  of  our  politicians.” 


CRITICS  OF  THE  PUBLIC  SCIIOOCS 

From  Catholic  News,  April  9th. 
1904: 

At  a  recent  meeting  of  the  Milonian 
Society,  a  teachers’  club  of  Brooklyn 
Principal  D.  Claire,  of  Public  School 
No.  211,  gave  a  summary  of  the  most 
important  criticisms  of  the  public 
schools.  Here  is  an  extract  from  hb 
paper: 

“Fighting  Bob  Evans  criticises  New- 
England  education,  our.  model,  in  un¬ 
fitting  boys  for  manlv  labor.  ‘Each- 
morning,’  he  says,  ‘at  the  Boston  Navy 
Yard  gate  came  a  big  line  of  well- 
dressed  boys  with  shabbily  clad  par¬ 
ents.  begging  me  to  enlist  them  as  ap¬ 
prentices  to  save  them  from  the  pool- 
100ms,  and  worse.  There  were  (el- 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


lows  ashamed  of  their  honest  parents 
who  had  pinched  themselves  that 
their  offspring  might  dress  like  gen¬ 
tlemen.  1  aimost  had  m  my  heart 
the  hope  that  every  high  school  would 
burn  to  the  ground  and  every  boy 
and  girl  would  be  compelled  to  woric 
with  their  hands  to  make  a  living,  as 
their  parents  did  befoie  them.’ 

“Rabbi  Hirscli  (.there  are  other 
prominent  writers  who  concur)  de¬ 
clares  that  our  present  education  fails 
to  produce  moral  here.  Crime  is  in¬ 
creasing.  Forge*  s  aie  good  penmen. 
Actors  of  immoral  plays  are  good 
readers.  Writers  of  lewd  books  are 
masters  of  rhetoric.  Illustrators  of 
obscene  literature  have  been  taught 
how  to  draw.  Embezzlers  are  skilled 
mathematicians.  All  of  the  arts  we 
teach  in  school  are  capable  of  making 
vice  and  crime  more  effective.  The 
moral  balance  is  lacking.  Without 
^  it,  education  is  not  only  a  failure;  it 
is  in  too  many  cases  an  evil  success^ 

“Judge  teuton,  of  Boston,  says 
literacy  is  not  enough:  1  do  not  ask 
the  criminals  any  longer,  “Can  you 
read  and  write?”  Every  one  can  do 
that  now.  'they  have  all  been  to 
school.  The  outside  of  the  cup  and 
the  platter  have  been  cleaned.  The 
times  demand  a  vital  reform.  Edu¬ 
cation  is  ready  for  a  complete  revolu¬ 
tion.’ 

“Editor  Edward  Bok  tells  his  read¬ 
ers  every  month  that  it  is  putting  the 
truth  mildly  to  state  that,  of  all  the 
American  institutions,  that  which 
deals  with  the  public  education  of  our 
children  is  the  most  faulty,  the  most 
unintelligent'  and  the  most  cruel.” 

The  men  who  speak  out  thus  aue 
not  Catholics,  and  their  criticisms 
cannot  be  disposed  of  in  the  old- 
fashioned  way  of  saying  that  Catho¬ 
lics  never  have  a  friendly  word  for 
the  public  schools.  Protestant  crit¬ 
ics  are  now  emphasizing  the  weak 
points  of  the  system.  If  is  note¬ 
worthy  that  they  almost  ail  agree 
with  the  Catholic  critics. 


MARCUS  A.  HANNA  ON  CATHOL- 
CITY. 

(From  Yonkers,  N.  Y.,  Home 
Journal.) 

Catholics  may  not  be  aware  that  the 
late  Marcus  Alonzo  Hanna  was  really 
a  staunch  advocate  in  high  places  of 
the  claims  of  the  Catholic  Church. 
P.  J.  O’Keefe  tells  of  some  rare  com¬ 
pliments  which  Mr.  Hanna  paid  to  our 
faith.  Some  three  years  ago  Presi¬ 
dent  McKinley  was  particularly  anx¬ 
ious  to  learn  the  Catholic  view  of  the 
administration’s  policy  in  the  Philip¬ 
pines.  Mr.  Hanna  introduced,  at  a 
special  audience,  his  lifelong,  loyal 


2& 

friend,  Rev.  P.  M.  Flannagan,  of  Chi¬ 
cago,  saying: 

“Mr.  President,  I  know  this  man 
well  and  can  vouch  for  who  and  what 
he  is  and  the  great  service  he  has- 
rendered  to  his  church  and  country,, 
and  I  want  you  to  bear  well  in  mind, 
his  words.  And  I  will  go  further,. 
Mr.  President,  and  say  to  you  that  the 
day  is  not  far  distant  when  we  shall 
have  a  greater  crisis  in  this  country 
than  that  which  we  just  passed, 
through.  The  Catholic  Church  nas  at 
all  times  furnished  some  of  the  most 
loyal  defenders  of  our  flag,  but  look, 
we  to  it  to  do  more.  The  day  is  com¬ 
ing  when  treason  will  rear  its  head, 
and  socialism  become  rampant,  and  in. 
mat  hour,  Mr.  President  (and  I  am. 
not  afraid  to  say  it  here  or  elsewhere ) 
the  Dag  must  rely  on  its  staunch, 
friends,  and  among  them,  in  my  opin¬ 
ion,  our  greatest  protectors  will  be 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United. 
States  and  the  Roman  Church.” 

And  again,  speaking  to  a  particular 
friend  in  most  scathing  terms  of  the 
socialistic  agitator  and  anarchist,  Mr. 
Hanna  paid  this  tribute:  “There  is  a. 
crisis  coming  on,  which  will  have  to- 
be  met,  and  the  sooner  the  better- 
Theie.is  no  place,  and  there  must  be 
none,  in  this  country,  for  anarchy  and. 
treason.  In  this  connection  1  once 
said  that  in  the  day  of  trouble  the 
United  States  must  look  to  the  Su¬ 
preme  Court  and  the  Roman  Catholic. 
Church.  I  will  go  further  now  and. 
say  that  I  believe  the  best  friend  and. 
protector  the  people  and  the  flag  of 
our  country  will  have  in  its  hour  of 
trial  will  be  the  Roman  Catholic. 
Church,  always  conservative  and  fail” 
and  loyal.  That  is  the  power  I  look 
to  to  save  the  nation.” 

Wherein,  then,  does  the  Catholic 
Church  possess  that  wonderful  powrer 
for  good  which  our  late  lamented  and. 
great  statesman  attributed  to  her? 
Certainly  in  this  one  fact,  that  she 
teaches  her  children  from  infancy,, 
both  in  her  schools  and  in  her 
churches,  that  all  power  and  authority 
of  state,  justly  exercised,  is  from  God,. 
Herein  she  has  the  ear  of  her  child¬ 
ren  ;  herein  she  has  the  power  for 
country  which  Mark  Hanna  attributed 
to  her — and  for  this  she  is  admired 
by  many,  envied  by  some,  a  blessing, 
to  all,  and  the  hope  of  our  nation! 

Nevertheless,  by  insinuation,  Mr.. 
Ditchburn  would  offer  insult  to  the- 
millions  of  Catholics  on  whom  Mix 
Hanna  said  the  nation  must  place  so* 
much  dependence  in  “the  hour  of 
trial.” 

But  you  will  say  that  Mr.  Hanna  was 
a  shrewd  politician,  and  was  making 
a  grand  bid  for  patronage  for  his  mas¬ 
ter,  President  Roosevelt,  and,  per¬ 
chance,  for  himself.  Be  it  so.  kind 
sir. 


IX  DE i'KN^E 


But  you  will  not  say  that  Wm.  H. 
'Taft,  former  governor  of  the  Philip¬ 
pine  Islands,  way  “seeking  foi  patron¬ 
age  or  bidding  for  voter;’'  when  he  de¬ 
livered  his  memorable-  address;  before 
the  Presbyterian  Social  Lnion  01!  Phil¬ 
adelphia  at  its*  fifteenth  annual  dinner 
-on  February  29,  1904. 

Mi*.  Taft  had  served  his  country  in 
the  Philippines  and  returned  to  re¬ 
ceive  the  reward  of  his  labors  in  the 
Orient,  and  thus  lie  spoke  on  the  occa¬ 
sion  above  referred  to: 

Win.  H.  Taft,  former  Governor  of 
the  Philippine  Islands,  said: 

“For  the  great  mass  of  Filipinos 
our  present  hope  of  making  them 
good  and  useful  citizens  is,  first  make 
them  good  Catholics. 

“How  can  your  Presbyterian  and 
other  Protestant  missions  help,"  lie 
asked,  “in  the  work  of  regeneration? 
By  founding  SCHOOLS,  hospitals,  asy¬ 
lums,  by  sending  your  ministers  and 
your  teachers,  who,  by  their  upright 
and  simple  lives  will  give  object  les¬ 
sons  of  the  Christian  character.  Lit¬ 
tle,  I  firmly  believe,  is  to  be  gained  for 
many,  many  years  in  attempts  to  pros- 
.  -elytize.  Not  competition,  but  Christ¬ 
ian  emulation,  is  the  method  to  be 
-employed.” 

But,  Mr.  Taft,  what  about  the  ship¬ 
loads  of  public  school  teachers  whom 
the  U.  S.  Government  has  sent  to  those 
islands  to  enlighten  (sic,)  the  poor  na¬ 
tives? 

^  \ 

Mr.  Taft  Tells  Us  on  the  Same  Feb.  29: 

“The  friars  made  parishes,  taught 
the  catechism,  taught  useful  things. 
Thus  it  is  that  we  found  ready  to  our 
hand  more  than  6,000,000  of  Malays 
who  are  Christians  and  who  are  re¬ 
ceptive  to  our  civilization. 

“No  one  who  knows  of  conditions 
as  they  have  been  will  charge  me 
with  partiality  to  the  friars.  Still.  I 
will  testify  to  the  work  and  the  use¬ 
fulness  of  these  men  of  God.  The 
Dominicans  established  the  University 
of  St.  Thomas  in  1610,  long  before  the 
■establishment  of  Harvard,  Yale  or  any 
-other  American  university.” 

“This  sentence,  taken  from  the  body 
■of  the  address  delivered  by  Wm.  H. 
Taft,  Secretary  of  War,  before  the 
Presbyterian  Social  Union  of  Philadel¬ 
phia,  at  its  fifteenth  annual  dinner,  ex¬ 
presses  the  most  important  part  of  his 
talk.”  For  a  certainty  we  may  say: 
"“Truth,  crushed  to  earth,  will  rise 
-again.” 

Mr.  Taft  might  have  said  further: 

The  Friars  brought  with  them  not 
only  the  school  books,  but  they 
brought,  also  the  crucifix.  They  not 
only  taught  the  geography  of  the 


OF  RELIGION' 

world,  but  they  taught  also  the  way 
to  God’s  kingdom.  They  taught  who 
was  the  King  of  Spain,  and  they  also 
taught  Who  was  the  Creator  and  King 
of  Heaven  and  earth.  They  taught 
that,  punishment  would  be  inflicted  for 
the  violation  of  the  laws  of  the  land, 
and  that  eternal  would  be  the  pun¬ 
ishment  for  grievous  violations  of 
God’s  eternal  laws. 

If  they  taught  the  savage  how  to 
cultivate  the  land  they  also  taught 
him  how  to  soften  his  heart  by  the 
love  of  God  and  of  his  neighbor.  If 
they  taught  the  savage  the  blessings 
of  civilization  they  also  taught  him 
“the  one  thing  necessary,”  the  wray  to 
salvation.  If  they  taught  him  to  for¬ 
give  and  to  forget  from  his  heart,  they 
also  held  up  to  him  the  Saviour,  dying 
on  the  cross  for  the  salvation  of  all 
and  forgiving  all. 

If  they  taught  the  savage  that  civ¬ 
ilization  was  founded  on  morality,  they 
also  taught  him  that  morality  was 
founded  on  religion,  and  that  if  to  have 
a  plurality  of  wives  and  to  murder  and 
steal  vrere  opposed  to  morality  and 
civilization  it  was  also  contrary  to  re¬ 
ligion  and  salvation. 

Did  they  teach  all  this  to  the  adult 
savage?  Yes,  as  far  as  possible,  but 
the  great  progress  was  made  by 
moulding  the  heart  of  the  young  in 
the  school  and  In  the  church.  Hence, 
Mr.  Taft,  with  all  those  who  have  spo¬ 
ken  before  him,  says  that  the  first 
work  tovrard  civilization  must  be  done 
in  the  schools.  He  joins  with  all  who 
have  spoken  before*  him  in  saying  that 
“without,  Christian  doctrine  one  may 
as  wrell  look  for  Christian  Morality  as 
for  a  superstructure  un sustained  by  a 
foundation.” 

In  a  word,  the  civilization  for  which 
Mr.  Taft  lauds  the  Friars  in  the  Phil¬ 
ippines  was  not  the  civilization  that 
springs  from  a  morality  of  the  tele¬ 
graph  and  telephone;  of  the  Pullman 
parlor  car  and  the  ocean  greyhound; 
of  the  smokeless  pow’der  and  the 
horseless  carriage;  of  the  wireless  tel¬ 
egraphy  and  “Godless  education,”  but 
it  was  the  morality  of  the  decalogue 
and  “Jesus  Christ  and  Him  crucified’’ 
— and  that  was  the  teaching  that  made 
“6,000.000  Malays  receptive  of  our  civ¬ 
ilization” — and  that  is  the  education 
at  which  Mr.  Ditchburn  hurls  his 
“slings  and  arrows”  and  poisoned 
darts,  and  for  so  doing  he  has  the 
“unanimous  approval  of  the  Educa¬ 
tional  Association  of  Schuylkill  Coun¬ 
ty.” — “'Tis  a  nipping  and  an  eager  air, 
my  lord.” 

But.  as  an  antidote  for  Mr.  Ditch- 
burn'  \  poison  we  take  the  liberty  to 
her.*  present  a  few  bouquets  cast  at 
us  from  “the  other  side  of  the  house,” 
a  >  follows: 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


27 


-GREATEST  DISASTER  THAT 

COULD  OVERTAKE  COUNTRY 


'WouM  be  the  Putting  Out  of  the  Fires 
That  Burn  on  Catholic  Altars,  Says 
Rev.  Dr.  Fish  burn,  Presbyterian. 


The  Inquirer,  Philada.,  Mar.  28. 

True  religion  is  not  passing,  as 
some  suppose,  was  the  declaration  of 
Rev.  W.  H.  Fishburn  last  night  during 
his  discourse  on  “The  Altar  Fires”  at 
the  First  Presbyterian  Church,  Cam¬ 
den. 

“In  these  investigating  days,”  said 
he,  “men  are  looking  narrowly  at  re¬ 
ligion.  But  in  spite  of  the  critical 
spirit,  religion  is  not  passing  away. 
The  men  of  today  are  more  deeply, 
more  intensely  religious  than  they 
were  at  any  former  period. 

“The  day  of  the  religious  fraud, 
the  religious  humburg,  is  happily 
passing  away.  Its  doom  is  sounded 
In  all  the  books  of  the  day,  in  all  the 
public  prints  of  the  day,  by  all  the 
lips  of  today.  Venerable  shams  are 
passing,  but  true  religion  is  not  pass¬ 
ing. 

“The  putting  out  of  the  fires  that 
burn  at  this  moment  on  Roman 
'Catholic  altars  would  be  the  greatest 
disaster  that  could  overtake  our  coun¬ 
try,”  said  Dr.  Fishburn.  “Were  any 
single  Protestant  body  to  be  abolished 
there  is  some  other  body  that  might 
take  its  place;  but  there  is  no  other 
body  that  could  take  the  place  of  the 
oldest  of  the  Christian  churches.” 


LESSONS  TAUGHT  BYr  CATHOLICS 

t  Rev.  Madison  C.  Peters  Thinks 
Protestants  Should  Learn. 

On  the  subject,  “What  Protestants 
Should  Learn  from  Catholics,”  Rev. 
Madison  C.  Peters  preached  a  forci¬ 
ble  sermon  last  evening  in  the  Broad 
street  Baptist  Church.  He  said,  in 
part: 

“Catholics  teach  us  the  lesson  of 
regular  and  constant  attendance  upon 
public  worship.  Protestants  go  when 
the  weather  is  just  to  their  liking.  It 
Is  high  time  that  an  umbrella  was  in¬ 
vented  that  would  protect  Protestants 
from  the  rain  on  Sunday.  The  Catho¬ 
lic  puts  his  church  first.  Seek  to  em¬ 
ploy  a  Catholic,  his  first  inquiry  is 
whether  there  is  a  church  near. 
Catholics  go  to  church  to  worship. 
Protestants  to  hear  an  eloquent 
preacher.  The  devotional  element  in 
"too  many  of  our  churches  is  lost  sight 
-of.  Catholics  seldom  ever  in  their 
prosperity  turn  against  their  church. 
Would  to  God  our  rich  Protestants 
were  as  faithful. 


“The  rich  Catholic  hesitates  not  to 
kneel  by  the  side  of  the  poorest. 
Protestants  have  too  keen  a  sense  of 
smell.  When  the  doors  of  our 
Protestant  churches  are  not  only  open 
but  the  world  outside  feels  that  the 
rich  and  poor  can  meet  together  with¬ 
out  invidious  comparisons,  the  great 
masses  now  outside  of  the  church  will 
pour  in  like  the  tides  of  the  sea.  Tf 
there  is  one  place  this  side  of  heaven 
where  men  ought  to  meet  on  a  com¬ 
mon  level  it  ought  to  be  in  the  house 
of  God  in  common  brotherhood  pros¬ 
trated  in  prayer  before  a  common 
Father. 

“Protestants  should  learn  from 
Catholics  how  to  give.  Catholics  are 
churches.  Behold  the  earnings  they 
lay  upon  the  altar  of  the  church. 

“Every  Catholic  is  identified  with 
some  parish.  There  are  thousands  of 
Protestants  in  this  city  whose  church 
membership  is  in  their  trunks,  or  in 
the  place  where  they  used  to  live. 
They  remind  me  of  those  matches 
that  strike  only  on  their  box — when 
you  have  the  match  you  haven't  the 
box,  and  when  you  have  the  box  you 
haven’t  the  match. 

“In  caring  for  their  children  Catho¬ 
lics  teach  tis  a  lesson.  The  Protes¬ 
tant  laity  need  to  be  awakened  to  a 
deep  sense  of  the  magnitude  of  their 
duty  toward  the  children.  Here  is 
the  source  of  strength  in  the  Catholic 
Church.  The  Catholic  Church  has 
been  charged  with  putting  too  much 
stress  upon  good  works  and  not 
enough  upon  faith.  Protestantism 
has  swung  to  the  other  extreme  and 
not  put  enough  stress  upon  good 
works.  Good  works  won’t  save,  but 
faith  without  works  is  dead.  The 
Catholic  charities,  covering  every 
conceivable  case  of  need  and  suffer¬ 
ing,  put  Protestants  to  shame.” 

“Though  poor  in  thanks  we  be,  yet, 
we  thank  thee.” 


THE  ATTITUDE  OF  CATHOLICS  ON 
THE  QUESTION  OF  EDUCATION 
PRAISED  BY  NON-CATHOLICS. 


Only  a  few  days  ago  a  writer  sign¬ 
ing  himself  “Protestant”  thus  wrote 
in  one  of  the  New  York  daily  papers: 
“The  movement  of  the  Roman  Catho¬ 
lics  to  secure  a  system  of  education 
which  shall  not  ignore  religion  is  a 
movement  in  the  right  direction.  And 
their  self-sacrificing,  efforts  in  main¬ 
taining  their  parochial  schools  for  this 
purpose  ought  to  cause  Protestants  to 
blush,  when  it  is  compared  with  their 
own  indifference  in  the  matter.”  We 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


are  not  accusomed  to  be  patted  on 
the  back  by  our  Protestant  fellow- 
countrymen. 

There  is  only  one  blot  on  the  oth¬ 
erwise  bright  page  of  the  Church  bat¬ 
tle  for  religion  in  the  classroom.  It 
is  the  bad  example  given  by  some 
Catholics  in  sending  their  children  to 
Protestant  or  infidel  colleges.  This 
is  a  scandal  to  the  Catholic  body  at 
large,  as  well  as  to  the  children  thus 
deprived  of  the  religious  teaching  to 
which  they  have  a  right.  Now,  Christ 
has  said  some  terrible  things  about 
the  one  who  gives  scandal.  “Better 
that  that  man  had  never  been  born.” 
It  is  useless  to  urge  in  defence  of  such 
un-Catholic  parents  that  the  college 
is  unsectarian.  I  hate  the  word.  IJn- 
sectarianism  is  a  sect,  and  one  of  the 
most  dangerous.  It  is  the  sect  of 
those  who  hold  that  God  has  no  place 
in  the  claccroom,  and  it  is  far  more 
important  to  enable  the  young  men  or 
women  to  rise  in  social  station  than 
to  have  them  learn  the  truths  of 
Christianity. 

This  is  paganism.  “For  after  all 
these  things  do  the  heathen  seek.”  In 
the  question  of  education  there  can  be 
no  unsectarianism.  To  listen  to  pro¬ 
fessors  for  four  or  five  hours  a  day, 
lecturing  on  philosophy,  history,  etc., 
and  to  hear  nothing  of  a  real  personal 
God  and  His  rights  over  men  and 
man’s  duties  toward  Him,  is  a  sectar¬ 
ian  object  lesson  that  will  sink  deeper 
into  the  hearts  of  the  young  than  any 
other  lesson  learned  within  those  un- 
sectarian  college  v/alls. 

Bourke  B.  Cochran,  N.  Y.,  in  his 
Washington’s  Birthday  address  at 
Philadelphia  said:  “If  intellectual 

culture  alone  were  sufficient,  then 
Greece  in  her  glory  would  still  be 
with  us,  because  in  the  achievements 
of  architecture,  literature,  sculpture 
and  very  likely  in  music  and  painting, 
subjects  that  indicate  the  greatest  de¬ 
velopment  of  the  human  mind,  Greece 
surpassed  everything  the  moderns 
have  attempted.  Yet  Greece  is  a 
memory.” 


CHINESE  MINISTER  SPEAKS. 

Wu  Ting  Fang.  Chinese  Minister  to 
the  United  States,  said  at  Philadel¬ 
phia  April  2,  19  02: 

“I  have  visited  many  of  your  col¬ 
leges  and  schools.  My  candid  judg¬ 
ment  compels  me  to  say  that  there  is 
something  here  that  is  lacking. 

“Unless  that  I  am  grievously  mis¬ 
taken.  your  system  of  education  is  di¬ 
rected  merely  to  mental  training.  In 
America  you  have  in  your  educational 
system  everything  but  moral  training.” 

Ha,  ha!  And  this  from  the  heathen 
Chinese,  Mr.  Ditchburn!!! 


The  Little  Jap  Speaks. 

“YOu  teach  too  much  arithmetics/* 
said  a  Japanese  visitor  to  an  American, 
school.  “In  Japan  we  teach  our  child¬ 
ren  manners;  then  we  teach  them 
morals;  after  that  we  teach  them 
arithmetic,  for  arithmetic  without 
manners  and  morals  makes  men  and 
women  sordid.” 

Holy  Scripture  teaches:  “It  is  a 
proverb:  A  young  man  according  to 
his  way;  eve  ,/hen  he  is  old  he  will 
not  depart  from  it.” 

Pagan  philosophy  no  less  than  the 
Bible  emphasizes  this  truth.  Seneca 
says:  “It  is  necessary  to  guide  tender 
minds,  but  very  difficult  to  root  up 
vices  which  have  grown  up  with  us.’* 

Quintilian  wrote:  “The  young  must 
be  trained  and  educated,  for  once  evil 
has  taken  root  one  can  easier  break, 
than  bend.” 

Webster. 

Daniel  Webster  in  his  famous  speech* 
in  the  Girard  case:  “It  is  a  mockery 
and  an  insult  to  common  sense  to 
maintain  that  a  school  for  the  instruc¬ 
tion  of  youth,  from  which  Christian 
instruction  by  Christian  teachers  is- 
sedulously  and  religiously  shut  out,  is- 
not  deistic  and  infidel  in  its  purpose 
and  in  its  tendency.” 

President  Roosevelt 

Said  in  an  address  ]>efore  the  Long 
Is’and  Bible  Society:  “There  is  in  the 
ZSnglish  language  no  word  more 
abased  than  that  of  education.  The 
popular  idea  is  that  the  educated  man 
is  one  who  has  mastered  the  learning 
of  the  schools  and  the  colleges.  *  * 

*  It  is  a  good  thing  to  be  clever,  to 
be  able  and  smart;  but  it  is  a  better 
thing  to  have  the  qualities  that  find 
their  expression  in  the  Decalogue  and 
the  Golden  Rule.” 

Lord  Disraeli  said:  “A  system  of 
national  education  without  religion 
will  produce  a  national  calamity  more 
disastrous  to  the  state  than  to  the 
church.” 

The  great  Mr.  Gladstone  said:  “Ev¬ 
ery  system  of  education  which  leaves 
out  religious  instruction  is  a  danger¬ 
ous  system.” 

Washington. 

“Of  all  .he  dispositions  and  habits 
which  lead  to  political  prosperity,  re¬ 
ligion  and  morality  are  indispensable 
supports.” 


MOST  REV.  PATRICK  JOHN  K VAN, 
I).  D.  LL.  I).,  ON.  THE  SCHOOL 
QUESTION. 

Most  ungracious  would  le  the  act 
on  our  part  were  we  to  cross  land  and' 
sea  in  search  of  “old  things  and  new” 
with  which  to  defend  the  cause  >'*' 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  HA  BOH 


"God  and  Country,”  and  at.  the  same 
trine  pass  over  the  honored  names  of 
those  whose  lives  have  been  spent  in 
exhorting  and  encouraging,  in  upbuild¬ 
ing  and  defending,  in  public  and  in 
private,  the  glorious  cause  of  Christ¬ 
ian  education.  I  refer  to  our  Most 
Rev.  Archbishop.  Patrick  John  Ryan, 
D.  D.  L.L.  D..  and  his  Rt.  Rev.  Aux¬ 
iliary  Bishop  Edmund  F.  Prendergast, 
D.  D.  V.  G.,  and  in  all  their  zeal  “in 
season  and  out  of  season,”  be  it  said 
to  their  glory,  ‘‘giving  offence  to  no 
man.”  Nor  may  we  pass  over  in  si¬ 
lence  the  labor  and  zeal  of  our  clergy 
and  the  devotion  and  sacrifice  of  our 
people,  in  erecting  and  supporting  our 
schools,  wherein  “the  greatest  boon 
e’er  given  to  man,”  “the  faith  of  our 
fathers,”  may  be  propagated  in  the 
hearts  of  our  children. 

Letter  of  Archbishop  Ryan. 

Our  Holy  Father  has,  in  his  letter 
to  the  Bishops  of  the  United  States  on 
the  school  question,  renewed  his  con¬ 
firmation  of  the  Decrees  of  the  Coun¬ 
cil  of  Baltimore.  All  Catholic  parents 
should  send  their  children  to  Catholic 
schools,  either  parochial  or  collegiate, 
unless  for  good  reasons  permitted  by 
ecclesiastical  authority  to  do  other¬ 
wise.  The  people  of  this  diocese  have 
made  great  sacrifices  to  build  and 
equip  and  support  their  schools.  We 
are  proud  of  their  zeal  for  the  Christ¬ 
ian  education  of  their  little  ones.  The 
Chicago  Educational  Exhibit,  from 
this  and  from  other  dioceses  of  the 
country,  has  clearly  shown  the  equal¬ 
ity,  if  not  superiority,  of  our  paro¬ 
chial  schools  and  colleges  to  rival  in¬ 
stitutions. 

We  thank  God  for  the  Brothers 
and  Sisters  of  the  various  religious  or¬ 
ders  devoted  to  Christian  education, 
who  have  proved  that  charity  can  ef¬ 
fect  more  than  gold.  Let  us  cheer 
them  and  second  them  in  their  noble 
work  of  preserving  the  rising  genera¬ 
tion  from  the'  twin  evils  of  ignorance 
and  vice:  let  the  people  show  their  ap¬ 
preciation  of  them,  and  their  enlight¬ 
ened  love  of  their  own  children,  by 
sending  those  children  to  Catholic- 
schools.  Your  devoted  servant  in 
Christ.  P.  J.  RYAN, 

Archbishop  of  Philadelphia. 


Now  we  would  respectfully  ask  Mr. 
Ditchburn  if  he  will  publicly  call  the 
learned  and  religious  gentlemen, 
whose  names  are  attached  to  the  fore¬ 
going  statements,  “Defamers  of  the 
public  school  and  croaks  and  birds  of 
ill-omen.”  “Tell  it  net  in  Gath,”  Mr. 
Ditchburn.  Or  will  he  say  that  their 
’“Enmity”  comes  from  an  opposition 
of  interference  “with  what  they  think 
to  be  to  their  interest  or  welfare”? 
“Alas!  Poor  Yorick!” 


Mr.  Ditchburn  has,  knowingly  or 
unknowingly,  agreed  with  the  fore¬ 
going  authorities  when  he  tells  us 
that  according  to  the  law  of  the  Great 
Jehovah,  “Education  of  the  child 
should  begin  with  the  first  breath  it 
draws.”  But  let  him  remember  that 
Mr.  Webster’s  Iriternatonal  Diction¬ 
ary  tells  us  that  “EDUCATION,”  (a 
drawing  forth)  implies  not  so  much 
the  communication  of  knowledge  as 
the  discipline  of  the  intellect  and  the 
regulation  of  the  heart.”  And  in¬ 
struction.  says  Mr.  vVebster,  “is  that 
part  of  education  which  furnishes  the 
mind  with  knowledge.” 

Hence,  all  the  foregoing  authorities, 
men  who  represent  the  leading 
thought  of  our  day,  acknowledge  that 
the  youth  of  the  land  are  being  in¬ 
structed  in  our  public  schools,  but  are 
not  being  fully  educated,  because  they 
are  not  being  taught  those  principles 
which  “draw  forth”  the  heart  and 
lead  it  up  to  God.  And  again  when  the 
Saviour  would  ask  for  the  most  sacred 
gift  within  the  power  of  man  to  be¬ 
stow,  He  did  not  ask  for  intellect  or 
wealth,  but  He  said:  “Son,  give  me 
thy  heart.” 

In  fine,  when  the  Church-men  and 
States-men  speak  as  above  quoted, 
they  are  not  to  be  considered  “ene¬ 
mies  of  the  public  schools,”  nor  are 
they  “Croaks  or  birds  of  ill-omen,” 
but  they  say,  “not  only  instruct  the 
intellect  in  the  sciences,  but  educate 
the  youth  of  our  land  and  then  they 
will  have  in  their  heart  a  knowledge 
of  the  science  of  God,  to  whom  all 
their  moral  actions  should  ultimately 
tend,  and  this  drawing  form  of  the 
heart  can  come  only  through  religious 
instruction.” 

“It  is  time  for  us  all,”  says  the 
“Lutheran  World”  of  December  10, 
1903,  “in  the  midst  of  an  irresolute 
generation,  to  be  presuaded,  and  tc 
act  upon  the  persuasion,  that  religion 
is  not  artistic  delight  in  a  divine  idea, 
but  a  personal  loyalty  to  a  Divine 
Saviour,  a  condition  in  which  we  take 
from  Him  our  law  and  our  life  and 
yield  to  Him  the  allegiance  of  our 
heart  and  our  service.” 

To  the  writer  it  would  appear  thal. 
all  the  foregoing  statements  may  be 
summed  up  into  the  answer  which 
the  Saviour  gave  to  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  and  Herodians  when  they 
asked  Him,  “Was  it  lawful  to  pay 
tribute  to  Caesar  or  no?”  and  He 
said:  “Render  to  Caesar  the  things 

that  are  Caesar’s, '' and  to  God  the 
things  that  are  God’s.” 

We  are  constantly  reminded  by  the 
Philadelphia  “North  American”  that 
Governor  Pennypacker  considered 
“Matthew  Stanley  Quay  a  greater 


so 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION  . 


statesman  than  Webster  or  Clay.” 
But  we  pause  for  someone  to  rise  to 
inform  us  that  the  Professor  from  Ta- 
maqua  is  a  greater  authority  on  re¬ 
ligion  and  morality  than  Washington, 


Webster,  Gladstone  and  Roosevelt- 
and  all  the  divines  and  learned  citi¬ 
zens  who  have  spoken  on  the  subject 
as  above  quoted.  Don't  all  speak  at 
once,  please! 


4 — Mr.  Ditchburrfs  Prison  Statistics  Palpably  Refuted 


“I  was  in  prison  and  you  did  not 
visit  me.” 

In  this  paper.  Mr.  Editor,  we  pro¬ 
pose,  first,  to  disprove,  on  tne  best 
possible  authority,  the  assertion  of 
Mr.  Ditchburn,  in  regard  to  prison  sta¬ 
tistics,  and  in  our  next  paper  to 
give  a  rapid  review  of  parts  of  his 
article  not  yet  referred  to.  But,  let 
me  first  disclaim,  with  all  the  force 
that  words  can  convey,  any  intention 
to  prove  by  the  following  statistics 
that  the  public  school  is  a  breeder  of 
criminals  or  a  hotbed  of  vice. 

Crime  was  from  the  beginning,  and 
will  be  until  the  end,  and  the  Saviour 
has  said  unto  us.  ‘‘Needs  be  that 
scandals  come.”  Cain  slew  Abel  in 
the  beginning  and  Judas  was  a  traitor 
and  a  suicide. 

But.  Mr.  Editor,  a  prominent,  pub¬ 
lic  and  educated  man  may  reasonably 
be  held  to  an  account,  or  asked  to  ex¬ 
plain  Iris  public  and  published  utter¬ 
ances. 

Now,  Mr.  Ditchburn  has  said,  in  his 
published  article  of  January  11,  as 
found  in  “The  Chronicle”  and  “Re¬ 
publican”  of  that  date:  “Make  an  ex^ 
animation  of  those  who  have  sunk  or 
are  sinking  into  prison  cells  anc  vou 
will  find  that  99  per  cent,  of  them 
were  never,  or  but  little,  under  such 
influence  as  that  of  the  public 
schools.”  In  accordance,  then,  with 
the  invitation  of  Mr.  Ditchburn,  and 
as  an  act  of  Christian  charity,  we 
have  visited  “the  spirits  that  are  in 
prison”  and  present  to  Mr.  Ditchburn 
and  your  readers  the  result  of  our  in¬ 
vestigation. 

Prison  Statistics  for  Mr.  Ditchburn. 

In  the  course  of  over  eleven  months 
of  1903  there  were  admitted  to  the 
Schuylkill  County  Prison  at  Pottsville, 
Pa.,  130  convicts,  of  whom,  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  prison  records,  84  attended 
public  schools,  4  attended  private 
schools,  and  42  attended  no  school  or 
both  public  and  private  school. 

Now',  as  those  who  have  attended  no 
school,  or  both  public  or  private 
schools,  would  not  change  the  net  re¬ 
sult  when  equally  divided  between 
public  and  private  schools,  we  leave 
them  out  and  we  find  the  following  re¬ 
sult: 


Percentage  of  convicts  in  Schuylkill 
County  Prison,  in  1903,  who  had  at¬ 
tended  public  schools,  .64  8-13. 

Percentage  of  convicts  in  Schuyl¬ 
kill  County  Prison  in  19  03,  who  at¬ 
tended  private  schools,  .03  1-13. 

Percentage  of  convicts  in  Schuylkill 
County  Prison  in  1903,  who  had  at¬ 
tended  both  private  and  public  or  no 
school,  3  2  4-13. 

Philadelphia  County  Prison. 

And,  again,  Mr.  Editor,  the  statis¬ 
tics  from  Philadelphia  County  Prison, 
show  as  follows: 

For  six  years  preceding  1903,  there- 
were  received  at  the  Philadelphia 
County  Prison  2,895  convicts,  of  whom 
2,170  registered  as  having  attended 
public  schools,  and  133  as  having  at¬ 
tended  private  schools,  and  3  88  as 
having  attended  no  school,  204  as- 
having  attended  both  schools. 

The  percentage,  then,  for  convicts 
in  Philadelphia  County  Prison  for  six 
years  preceding  1903  would  be  as  fol¬ 
low's: 

From  public  schools,  about  .7  4  1-2.. 

From  private  schools,  about  .04  1-2.. 

From  no  schools,  about  .13  1-2. 

From  both  schools,  about  .07  1-2. 

Huntingdon  Reformatory. 

The  records  of  the  Huntingdon  Re¬ 
formatory  for  the  Eastern  District  of 
Pennsylvania  show  that  during  1903 
there  were  committed  to  that  institu¬ 
tion  361,  of  whom  312  attended  pub¬ 
lic  schools;  24  attended  private 
schools,  and  2  5  attended  no  school  or 
both  schools. 

Th<‘  r  ercentage  of  those  who  at¬ 
tended  public  schools  wTas  .86  1-2. 

The  percentage  of  those  who  at¬ 

tended  private  schools  was  .06  3-5. 

The  percentage  of  those  who  at¬ 

tended  both  schools  was  .08  9-10. 

House  of  Refuge  at  Glen  Mills,  Del¬ 
aware  County,  Pa.,  for  Boys 
Under  1(>  Years. 

Committed  during  1903,  359,  of 

whom : 

297  attended  public  schools,  or 

.82  4-5  per  cent. 

4  3  attended  private  schools,  or  .12 
per  cent. 

19  attended  no  schools,  or  .05  1-& 
per  cent. 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


31 


Eastern  Penitentiary  at  Philadelphia. 

488  admitted  in  the  year  1902. 

371  attended  public  schools,  or 
.76  1-5  per  cent. 

14  attended  private  schools,  or 
.02  4-5  per  cent. 

33  attended  both  schools;  or  .06  7-10 
per  cent. 

70  attended  no  schools,  or  .14  3-10 
per  cent. 

Total,  488,  or  100  per  cent. 

“Of  the  48  8  received,  69  had  ac¬ 
quired  trades  by  apprenticeship,  24 
had  acquired  trades  other  than  by  ap¬ 
prenticeship,  and  395  had  no  trades, 
and  288  were  idle  when  arrested.” 


Again,  Mr.  Editor,  I  beg  to  assure 
you  that  for  me  to  enter  into  the  fore¬ 
going  figures  is  no  pleasing  task,  nor, 
as  has  been  said,  is  it'  for  the  purpose 
of  proving  or  disproving  anything  for 
any  school,  public  or  private.  But  it 
is,  *  positively  and  most  emphatically, 
to  prove  that  when  the  Professor 
from  Tamaqua  made  and  published 
the  statements  above  quoted,  and  in¬ 
vited  examination  thereof,  he  used 
extravagant  language,  and  made  an 
unwarranted  statement  that  will  not 
bear  investigation  or  careful  analysis. 

To  establish  this  I  am  obliged  to 
give  the  figures  as  found  in  the  rec¬ 
ords  of  the  institutions  above  named, 
and  not  a  mere  denial,  as  he  made  a 
mere  assertion.  Not  “words,  words!” 
Mr.  Editor,  but  facts,  facts,  Mr. 
Ditchburn! 

When  we  consider  how  widely  sepa¬ 
rated  are  the  institutions  from  which 
the  above  statistics  were  received,  we 
may  at  least  hope  that  Mr.  Ditchburn 
will  not  presume  to  say  that  the  State 
officials  who  are  at  the  head  of  those 
Institutions  are,  or  could  be,  “under 
the  influence  of  that  half  of  the 
Christian  Church”  to  whose  members 
Mr.  Ditchburn  refers  as  “defamers 
of  the  public  sphools.” 

Only  quite  recently  the  New  York 
Sun  proved  a  similar  result  with 
prison  statistics  received  from  other 
parts  of  the  country. 

But,  I  imagine,  that  I  hear  some 
person  in  the  “audience”  to  say,  “You 
are  taking  this  man  too  seriously.” 
In  answer  let  me  say,  that  I  am  not 
disproving  the  above  statement  from 
Mr.  Ditchburn,  as  a  man,  but  as  the 
superintendent  of  public  schools  in 
Tamaqua.  We  all,  and  frequently, 
hear  men  make  loud  and  extravagant 
assertions,  but  we  do  not  take  their 
words  seriously.  We  consider  who  is 
the  man,  what  have  been  his  oppor¬ 
tunities,  what  is  his  education,  what 
is  his  standing  or  position  in  society, 
what  is  his  responsibility  to  society? 
All  these  conditions  having  been  con¬ 
sidered,  we  take  him  seriously  or 


otherwise.  For  example,  during  a. 
heated  political  campaign  we  hear  or- 
read  political  harangues  from  repre¬ 
sentatives  of  both  or  all  parties  con¬ 
cerned,  and  often  our  conclusion  is 
that  the  speaker  “has  been  talking 
to  the  galleries,”  or  “making  a  bid  for 
votes.”  And,  now,  Mr.  Editor,  when 
we  apply  those  principles  to  Mr. 
Ditchburn,  will  you,  or  the  reader, 
say  I  have  taken  him  too  seriously? 
Whom  have  I  taken  too  seriously?  * 
Not  one  of  those  poor  creatures,  who- 
Mr.  Ditchburn  says  is  not  a  “moral” 
man  because  “he  must  work  from 
early  morn  until  far  into  the  night 
for  the  meanest  necessaries  of  life.”' 
Not  a  mere  politician  making  a 
“stump  speech”  to  the  galleries,  to 
catch  “votes”  for  his  party. 

But  the  above  quotation  was  the 
extravagant  language,  the  unwarrant¬ 
ed  assertion  of  the  Superintendent  of 
public  schools  in  Tamaqua,  and  he  in¬ 
vited  examination  thereof! 

It  is  neither  a  disgrace  to  our  coun¬ 
try  nor  a  reflection  on  her  institu¬ 
tions,  nor  is  it  discouraging  to  society, 
that  among  our  citizens  there  should 
be  found  violators  of  the  law  and 
those  who  languish  in  a  prison-cell. 

Wrong  and  wrong-doers  have  been 
from  the  beginning,  and  will  be  unto 
the  end.  We  had  rather  say  that 
men  are  convicts,  not  because  of  our 
public  institutions  but  in  spite  of 
them! 

Mr.  Editor,  if  a  bishop  of  any  of 
our  great  religious  denominations 
were  to  say  in  print  that  99  per  cent. 

of  those  in  prison  were  not  members 
of  his  particular  sect,  we  would  be 
surprised  and  would  not  believe  him. 
But  a  bishop  of  any  of  our  religious 
denominations  would  be  far  more 
jutified  in  making  such  an  assertion 
than  was  Professor  Ditchburn.  Be¬ 
cause  only  a  part  of  the  people  be¬ 
long  to  any  particular  denomination, 
whereas  nearly  all  the  people  have 
been  educated  in  our  public  schools, 
and,  consequently,  Mr.  Ditchburn 
would  have  been  as  fully  justified  in 
saying  that  99  per  cent,  of  the  crimi¬ 
nals  of  our  country  are  not  Ameri¬ 
can  citizens,  as  he  was  in  saying  that 
“9  9  per  cent,  of  those  who  have  sunk 
and  are  sinking  into  prison  cells 
were  never,  or  but  little,  under  such  • 
influences  as  that  of  the  public 
schools.”  All  this,  not  to  reflect  on 
our  public  schools,  but,  Mr.  Editor, 
the  reflection,  and  a  great  one.  is  on 
Professor  Ditchburn.  unless  he  can 
give  some  better  proof  than  his  mere 
assertion.  He  owes  it  to  the  tax¬ 
payers  and  to  his  own  reputation  as 
a  public  official  to  do  so. 

It  has  been  said,  and  truly,  “That 
undue  flattery  partakes  the  nature  of 
detraction.”  If  this  be  so,  and  we 


2 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


doubt  it  not,  then  we  are  justified  in 
•saying  that  Mr.  Ditchburn  has  so 
■overstepped  the  bounds  of  reason¬ 
ableness  in  his  extravagant  lauda¬ 
tion  of  our  public  schools  that  he 
has  rendered  questionable  his  evi¬ 
dence,  and,  if  it  were  possible,  by  his 
undue  flattery,  he  has  detracted  from 
the  honor  due  by  him  to  his  “alma 
mater,”  the  public  schools. 

An  Appeal  to  the  “Bench  and  Bar.” 

To  you  the  gentlemen  of  the 
“Bench  and  Bar,”  versed  in  the  legal 
code  and  dispensers  of  justice,  let  me 
say:  If  a  witness  were  to  give  testi¬ 
mony  in  our  courts  in  any  case,  civil 
or  criminal,  and  you  were  convinced 
that  his  testimony  would  not  bear 
cross-examination  in  regard  to  his¬ 
tory  or  statistics  on  account  of  his  un¬ 
warranted  assertions,  would  you  not 
consider  his  evidence  tainted,  and 
would  the  Court  instruct  the  jury  to 
render  a  verdict  of  guilty  on  such  evi¬ 
dence?  Certainly  not!  And  you,  the 
Intelligent  public,  who  are  the  jury 
in  the  case,  would  you  render  a  ver¬ 
dict  of  guilty  on  such  evidence?  “Tell 
it  not  in  Gath.”  And,  again,  the  evi¬ 
dence  of  such  a  witness  having  been 
shaken,  or  rendered  questionable,  in 
one  particular,  would  you  not  all, 
judge  and  jury  and  attorney,  look 
with  grave  suspicion  on  all  the  evi¬ 
dence  he  would  give  in  the  case  being 
tried?  Your  silence  gives  consent! 

One  Step  Further. 

Now,  gentlemen  of  the  “Bench  arid 
Bar,”  you,  Mr.  Editor,  and  the  jury, 
the  reading  public,  hear  my  appeal: 
The  superintendent  of  public  schools 
at  Tamaqua,  R.  F.  Ditchburn,  sallied 
forth  from  his  retreat  and  accustomed 
retirement  and  appeared  before  “The 
Educational  Association”  of  Schuylkill 
County  on  January  11,  1904,  and  be¬ 
fore  that  educated  body  of  our  hon¬ 
ored  fellow-citizens  he  expounded  a 
code  of  morals  which,  it  is  said,  he 
bad  been  preparing  for  three  months 
previous  to  the  aforesaid  January  11, 
1904.  I  confess  to  all  my  hearers 
that,  after  reading  his  address  several 
times,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  determine  just 
what  he  desired  to  prove.  To  my 
mind  it  is  a  case  of  “confusion  worse 
•confounded.” 

But  the  following  facts  are  clear  to 
all  and  “he  that  runs  may  read  them:” 
To  one  class  of  his  fellow-citizens  he 
says,  by  implication,  99  per  cent,  of 
you  are  in  prison.  To  another  class 
he  says,  if  you  are  not  in  prison  it  is 
only  because  we  have  not  prisons 
enough  to  hold  you  all.  To  a  third 
class  he  says,  “You  are  croaks  and 
birds  of  ill-omen,  and  defamers  of  our 
public  schools.”  To  a  fourth  class  he 
says:  You  are  not  moral  men  because 


“you  trudge  from  early  morn  till  far 
into  the  night  for  the  meanest  neces¬ 
saries  of  life.”  To  a  fifth  class  he 
says,  “You  are  poor,  but  honest,”  and 
that  is  very  significant. 

Mr.  Editor,  is  this  analysis  too 
searching?  .Are  not  those  his  own 
words  found  in  his  article?  Then  you 
ask  who  are  left?  I  suppose  a  sixth 
class,  who  will  say  to  themselves:  “We 
are  holier  than  thou.”  And,  Mr.  Edi¬ 
tor,  when  that  is  said,  or  implied,  let 
every  honest  Christian  man  put  the 
one  hand  on  his  heart  and  gasp  for 
breath,  and  the  other  hand  on  his 
pocketbook,  lest  it  quietly  disappear! 
And,  again,  when  such  is  come  to  pass, 
let  all  Christian  lovers  of  their  coun¬ 
try  not  only  say,  “Angels  and  ministers 
of  grace  defend  us,”  but  say  “Our 
Father,  Who  Art  in  Heaven,”  defend 
our  country  and  her  institutions,  not 
from  her  enemies,  but  from  her  so- 
called  friends! 

Now'  to  the  point:  He  invited  us  to 
“make  an  examination  of  those  who 
have  sunk  or  are  sinking  into  prison 
cells,”  and  he  assures  us  that  we  would 
find  that  99  per  cent,  of  them  were 
never  under  the  influence  of  public 
school  “morality.” 

We  have  done  as  he  requested  and 
proved  by  State  authority  that  Prof. 
Ditchburn  was  mistaken.  Whether 
his  error  was  a  formal  or  a  material 
one  we  say  not.  But  his  testimony  in 
this  particular  and  very  important 
point  is  become  tainted  and  until  he 
disproves  the  foregoing  figures  by  an 
authority  superior  to  the  records  of 
the  institutions  from  which  the  rec¬ 
ords  were  received,  his  testimony  loses 
force  in  the  matter  under  considera¬ 
tion. 

The  Motives  Which  Prompted  Such 
Language. 

In  the  prosecution  of  every  criminal 
charge  the  motives  which  prompted 
the  act  play  a  most  important  part.  It 
is  duly  in  order  for  us  to  ask  what 
motives  could  have  prompted  Mr. 
Ditchburn  to  make  such  criminal 
charges  against  so  many  of  his  fellow- 
citizens?  We  say  criminal  charges, 
but  he  did  even  more.  He  made  con¬ 
victs  of  them  without  even  giving  them 
a  trial.  It  is  true  “that  ignorance  of 
the  lawr  excuses  none.”  But  Mr. 
Ditchburn  could  not  plead  ignorance. 
He  is  an  aged,  an  estimable  and  edu¬ 
cated  man.  We  v'ould  not  permit  our¬ 
selves  to  even  think  that  bigotry  or 
race  prejudice  caused  him  to  belch 
forth  such  an  assault  on  his  unoffend¬ 
ing  neighbors;  yes,  on  men  of  his  own 
town,  who,  by  their  taxes,  earned  in 
their  sweat  and  blood,  make  of  Mr. 
Ditchburn  “a  moral  man.”  Yet  Mr. 
Ditchburn  outraged  their  feelings 
when  he  said,  “you  trudge  for  a  liv-» 


AND  the  DIGNITY  of  labor 


S3 


Ins:;”  at  best  you  are  ‘‘poor,  but  hon¬ 
est,  and  that  is  very  significant.” 

Was  he  prompted  to  this  defense  of 
public  schools  by  the  progress  of  re¬ 
ligious  schools  in  our  county?  There 
■was  no  occasion  for  alarm  on  that 
-score.  There  are  today  in  the  public 
schools  of  Schuylkill  county  38,836 
children,  and  in  the  parochial  schools 
of  our  county  only  1,689.  Hence 
there  was  no  good  cause  why  he 
should  join  ‘‘the  coppersmiths  of 
Ephesus  in  opposition  to  Paul  and  in 
defence  of  the  temple  of  Diana.” 

To  be  more  exact,  the  population  of 
Schuylkill  county  is  estimated  at  173,- 
000.  The  Catholic  population  is  esti¬ 
mated  at  6f>,000,  and  out  of  that  65,- 
000  we  have  only  1,6  89  children  in 
private  or  parish  schools.  This  would 
prove  to  Mr.  Ditc'nburn  that  there  are 
nor.  in  our  county  so  many  ‘‘defamers 
of  public  schools,  croaks  and  birds  of 
ill-omen”  as  he  would  in  his  night¬ 
mare  imagine.  Again,  if  we  add  to 
the  Catholic  population  of  our  county 
the  Lutherans  and  Episcopalians, 
whose  religious  tenets  approve  of  such 
schools,  and  who  support  them  wher¬ 
ever  possible,  we  shall  have  about 
7  5,000  citizens  in  our  county  whose 
feelings  have  been  outraged  by  the  un¬ 
dignified,  inaccurate  and  impolitic 
lecture  of  Professor  Ditchburn.  And 
this  lecture  received  the  ‘‘unanimous 
approval  of  the  Educational  Associa¬ 
tion  of  Schuylkill  County.” 

But  this  much  we  do  believe,  that 
whatever  may  have  been  the  real  mo¬ 
tive  for  such  utterances.  scarcely 
■could  the  Professor  have  devised  a 
more  eloquent  appeal  to  all  lovers  of 
religion  and  morality,  to  examine  into 
the  necessity  of  Christian  education 
for  their  children,  than  by  the  publica¬ 
tion  of  his  lecture  of  January  11,  1904. 
That  lecture  is  sufficient  to  cause  all 
who  have  any  regard  for  God  and 
His  law  to  say  with  Mr.  Schaffer,  Su¬ 
perintendent  of  Public  Instruction  in 
Ppnnsvlvanifl  •  “Wp  will  Tint  nprmit 


Pennsylvania:  ‘‘We  will  not  permit 

anyone  who  is  either  irreligious  or  in- 
dLTerent  to  religion  to  teach  our 
children  in  the  public  schools.”  And, 
moreover,  if  the  sentiments  of  Mr. 
Ditchburn  are  to  prevail,  then  it  be¬ 
comes  our  Christian  duty  to  establish 
our  own  schools  for  the  preservation 
of  religion  and  morality  in  the  hearts 
of  our  children,  in  our  homes  and  in 
our  country. 

And  still  further,  Mr.  Editor,  and 
kind  reader,  you  will  agree  with  me 
that  ‘‘an  aged  and  estimable  and  ed¬ 
ucated  man”  must  know  that  1,689 
will  not  bear  a  proportion  of  over  9  9 
per  cent,  to  38,8  36;  or,  as  the  Profes¬ 
sor  puts  it,  ‘‘99  per  cent,  of  our  crimi¬ 
nals  were  never  in  a  public  school.” 

But  what  were  his  motives?  We 
hesitate  to  further  prosecute  this  feat- 


of  investigation  lest  we  be- 
_ome  gunty  of  inciting  our  feeling  to 
a  not  °i  words  not  pleasing  “to  ears 
ol  flesh  and  blood.” 

But  what  shall  we  say  of  the  mem- 

w^o  ^  1.he  '<E.ciucation-aI  Association” 
a  gave  their  unanimous  approval 

,art'hvTd-?  Te  »•**  conclude  thta 

£?tth  Ha*  y,!’*:.u°h!  s"amo  on  thee, 
saiin  Sidon  to  the  Sea.” 

nhleV\G-TX  W‘  PePPer>  of  Becksville 
“Tim  iifU  recently,  in  a  sermon  on 
ton  -”  aml  c^acter  of  Washing¬ 
ton.  As  a  Methodist  and  a  Prot- 
estan  of  the  Protestants  I  cannot  pem 

nnL-  opportunity  to  pass  without 
uttering-  an  indignant  protest  against 

f'»a‘  empts,  “>  violateP  the  con*sM?u- 
on  b>  wanton  and  infernal  attempts 

CathoHoS?enhe  '°^lty  ot  °U1'  Ro'An 
Latholic  fellow  citizens.  Only  a  few 

jears  ago  the  Methodists  were  de¬ 
famed  m  like  manner.” 

M  e  would  not  even  insinuate  that 
the  words  of  Rev.  Pepper  are  appli¬ 
cation^  °U\  fe,I?w  citizens  of  the  Edu- 
CV,  m .  Association  of  Schuylkill 
•  V  because  we  admire  them 

in'  ::;LPriVate  lives-  we  greet  them 
1  public,  we  would  defend  them 

and  reasonable  circumstance 

and  we  give  into  their  charge  to  be 
moulded  and  developed.  he  most 
precious  gems  that  God  has  given  to 
man.  38,836  of  our  innocent  little 
Children.  But,  may  we  not  expect 
those  gentlemen  of  the  classroom  to 
mould,  the  minds  and  hearts  of  the 

•la°jMn5  0,1  !Jnes  different  from  those 
laid  down  by  Mr.  Ditchburn?  And 

may  not  the  parents  of  those  children 
“norr  the  fa-e  gentlemen  S 
75  ana  r  app,au^  one  who  calls 
i)1.11our  citizens  “croaks  and 
^Nomen.”  and  says  to  thou- 
®a*ds  .of.  theai  by  implication,  if  you 

if  we  ha PnS°n  yoU  would  be  there 
£ad  f™sons  enough  to  hold  you. 
lell  it  not  in  Gath.”  which,  being  in¬ 
terpreted,  might  mean,  “Do  me^  no 
harm,  good  man.” 

Verdict. 

>3UtJf;  Mr‘  Pitchburn’s  testimony  in 
egard  to  prison  statistics  is  proved 
to  be  tainted  and  questionable,  shall 

Tcf  ®r  canpve  acpept  his  code  of  morals 
as  coirect  and  unquestionable?  Can 
vc  as  Christians  accept  without  fur¬ 
ther  consideration  from  a  ouestionable 
Mltness  a  doctrine  of  morality  from 
which  the  foundation  of  morality,  God 
aua  bps  law,  are  excluded?  Certainly 

Conclusion. 

If  Mr.  Ditchburn  had  made  his 
quoted  remarks  in  the  giow  of  an 
after-dinner  speech,  or  in  “a  few  ex¬ 
tempore  remarks”  to  a  few  friends  “to 
the  manner  born,”  who  would  applaud 
and  forget,  certainly  no  one  would 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


3  4 


take  him  seriously.  But  when  he  has 
time  to  write  and  correct,  revise  and 
examine,  consult  his  authorities  and 
weigh  every  word,  and  he  the  Superin¬ 
tendent  of  public  schools  at  Tamaqua. 
we  must  take  him  seriously,  and  we 
do. 

A  Serious  Matter. 

It  certainly  is,  and  all  honest  men 
will  acknowledge  it  is  a  serious  mat¬ 
ter  for  a  public  man,  a  leader  of 
youth,  an  expounder  of  morality,  to 
commit  himself  to  such  extravagant 
language  and  to  place  himself  in  a 
compromising  position. 

Every  pupil  in  a  school,  public  or 
private,  looks  up  to  Iiis  teacher  as  a 
superior  who  says  nothing  that  he 
cannot  prove.  And  if  the  teacher  or 
principal  is  guilty  of  extravagant 
language  the  pupil  wnl  resort  to  the 
same  and  lose  respect  for  the  superior. 

In  my  heart  I  have  too  much  re¬ 
spect  for  our  public  schools  to  think 


they  are  in  need  of  the  extravagant 
words  Professor  Ditchburn  has  writ¬ 
ten  for  them. 

And,  again.  Mr.  Editor,  I  have  too 
much  respect  for  the  Christian, 
churcli-going,  God-fearing  people  of 
Tamaqua  and  Schuylkill  County  to- 
even  imagine  that  they  will  nail  their 
Christian  convictions  to  the  mast  with 
Mr.  Ditchburn’s  doctrine  of  morality, 
which  is  without  the  Saviour  and 
God’s  law. 

The  writer  of  these  papers  has  no 
pretention,  nor  would  he  presume  to 
say,  that  they  are  perfect.  The 
searching  eye  of  the  critic  may  unve 
a  “coach  and  four”  through  the  lines, 
if  he  so  chooses.  But  I  do  assert  pos¬ 
itively  that  I  have  given  the  best  pos¬ 
sible  authority  for  every  important  as¬ 
sertion,  and  were  it  not  for  the  time  it 
required  to  obtain  such  authority,  Mr. 
Ditchburn  might  have  been  answered 
readily  and  in  a  few  days  after  the 
publication  of  his  article. 


5 — A  General  Review 


“My  country,  ’tis  of  thee,  sweet  land 
of  Liberty,  of  thee  I  sing.” 

Mr.  Editor,  I  hope  you  will  not  im¬ 
agine  that  I  so  far  ignore  Mr.  Ditch- 
burn’s  views  on  morality  as  to  say 
that  there  is  no  such  morality  as  he 
speaks  of.  There  is,  indeed,  such 
morality;  but  it  is  in  the  wider  and 
broader  sense  and  meaning  of  the 
term. 

Hence,  all  those  whom  I  have  quot¬ 
ed,  from  Washington  to  Roosevelt,  in 
speaking  of  Christian  morality,  invar¬ 
iably  say,  either  directly  or  indirectly, 
“religion  and  morality.” 

Those  were  sacred  words  of  Wash¬ 
ington:  “Reason  and  experience  both 
forbid  us  to  expect  that  national  mor¬ 
ality  can  prevail  in  exclusion  of  relig¬ 
ious  principles.” 

Therefore,  when  Mr.  Ditchburn 
says,  “life  and  all  that  goes  to  make 
life,”  and  “thou  shalt  not  kill,”  are 
at  the  bottom  of  morality,  he  takes 
the  term  in  its  broadest  sense  and 
meaning,  as  did  the  Pagans,  but  not 
in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  accepted 
by  Christians  who  are  guided  by  the 
Decalogue  and  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount. 

But  why  not  inform  his  anxious 
readers  on  what  authority  he  gives 
this  command?  Or,  if  He  who  gave 
this  command,  “Thou  shalt  not  kill.” 
pave  any  other  command,  why  not  tell 
his  readers  why  man  is  obliged  to 
obey  these  Commandments?  By  so 
doing  he  would  lead  his  hearers  from 


a  natural  to  a  supernatural  morality; 
from  an  ethical  culture  to  a  revealed 
religion  up  to  God. 

Herbert  Spencer  says  in  his  “Facts 
and  Comments”:  “The  Agnostic  who 
thinks  he  can  provide  forthwith  ade¬ 
quate  guidance  by  setting  forth  a 
natural  code  of  right  conduct  duly  il¬ 
lustrated  is  under  an  illusion.” 

“Thou  shalt  not  kill,”  then,  is  only 
a  natural  law,  because  it  is  stamped 
io  the  heart  of  every  man,  no  matter 
how  illiterate. 

Those  fundamental  principles  of  so- 
ciely  were  given  to  man  with  and  to 
make  his  human  nature.  But  the 
Giver  of  that  natural  law  did  not  leave 
man,  the  noblest  of  His  creatures,  to 
work  out  his  ultimate  end  by  the 
natural  law  only.  He  gave  him  also  a 
revealed  law,  and  from  the  beginning 
He  sent  those  who  were  to  expound 
that  divine  law,  and  did  not  leave 
man  to  grope  in  the  dark,  and  be 
moral  only  according  to  his  “environ¬ 
ments,  age  or  sex.” 

St.  Paul  tells  us  that,  “he  who  has 
sinned  without  the  law  will  be  judged 
without  the  law,  but  he  who  has 
sinrn*'!  with  the  law  will  be  judged  by’ 
the  law.”  What  did  he  mean?  He 
meant  that  those  who  had  sinned  be¬ 
fore  the  promulgation  of  the  revealed 
law  would  be  judged  by  the  law  of 
nature  stamped  in  their  conscience, 
and  those  who  had  offended  under  the 
revealed  law  would  be  judged  by  ihe 
reveaWi  law. 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


3$ 


Moreover,  Mr.  Editor,  all  thought¬ 
ful  Christian  men  will  readily  under¬ 
stand  how  deficient  must  be  a  moral 
code  which  has  for  its  foundation  only 
that  part  of  the  natural  law  which 
says,  “Thou  shalt  not  kill,’’  and  makes 
no  reference  to  the  life  and  teachings 
of  the  Saviour  and  Redeemer,  who 
came  to  give  us  the  new  and  more  per¬ 
fect  law,  the  law  of  love,  which  com¬ 
bines  the  law  of  Mount  Sinai  with  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  and  becomes  at 
once  the  only  guide  to  true  morality 
for  Christian  men. 

St.  Paul  tells  us  that  in  the  Old  Dis¬ 
pensation  God  spoke  to  the  Fathers 
by  the  Prophets,  but  in  the  New  Dis¬ 
pensation  He  spoke  to  us  by  His  Be¬ 
loved  Son.  instructing  us  to  renounce 
all  ungodliness  and  to  “live  soberly, 
justly  and  piously.’’  Mr.  Ditchburn 
says:  “Neither  shalt  thou  diminish  the 
pleasure  of  living.”  This  is  truly  a 
broad  assertion  flowing  from  his 
broad  “morality.”  The  Pagans  of  An¬ 
cient  Greece  and  Rome  never  said 
more.  They  said,  “we  live  to  eat;”  but 
Christian  morality  says,  “we  eat  to 
live.” 

The  happiness  and  pleasure  of  life 
are  all  very  good  when  in  accordance 
with  right  reason.  But  the  Saviour 
has  told  us,  “He  that  lives  according 
to  the  flesh  shall  die;”  and  in  a  broad 
sense,  what  is  that  but  the  pleasures 
of  life  to  excess?  And  Mr.  Ditchburn 
uses  neither  restriction  nor  qualifica¬ 
tion. 

“Life  and  the  love  of  life,”  says  the 
Professor,  “and  *the  pursuit  of  happi¬ 
ness  are  the  foundation  of  the  Dec¬ 
alogue  and  every  true  system  of 
morals.” 

The  pursuit  of  happiness  is  only  a 
natural  morality,  but  the  Decalogue  is 
the  foundation  of  true  morality,  be¬ 
cause  it  leads  man  to  a  life  super¬ 
natural.  Hence  the  Saviour  said:  “He 
that  saves  his  life  shall  lose  it,  and  he 
that  loses  his  li'fe  shall  save  it.” 

Is  “Poverty  a  Standing  Menace  To  All 
Goodness?” 

The  Professor  tells  us  that  “mor¬ 
ality  is  never  high  where  people  have 
to  struggle  from  early  morn  till  far 
Into  the  night  for  the  meanest  neces¬ 
saries  of  life.”  We  acknowledge  that 
such  people  may  be  embarrassed  and 
must  deny  themselves  many  comforts, 
but  we  deny  that  it  follows  that  they 
are  not  good  moral  men  as  a  rule  in 
the  sense  of  Christian  morality.  Let 
us  take  the  working  man  of  Tamaqua! 
They  are  either  employed  in  the  mines 
or  on  the  railroad.  The  miner  leaves 
his  home  early,  and  certainly 
“trudges”  all  day  in  the  bowels  of  the 
earth,  and  not  for  a  very  handsome 
salary.  The  man  employed  on  the 


railroad  turns  his  face  to  the  north'1 
or  to  the  south,  and  is  absent,  “trudg¬ 
ing”  in  snow  and  storm  for  two  and1 
three  days  at  a  time.  His  fare,  lik® 
the  miner’s,  when  at  work,  is  the  com¬ 
monest  and  the  coldest,  if  not  just 
“the  meanest.”  Their  manner  may  be 
uncouth  and  their  language  not  re¬ 
fined,  but  to  say  they  are  not  moral 
men  would  be  to  offer  an  insult  to  the 
bone  and  sinew  of  our  nation.  A3  a 
rule,  they  pay  their  honest  debts; 
they  endeavor  to  acquire  a  respectable 
home  for  their  family;  they  educate 
their  children;  they  go  to  church  when 
time  permits;  they  are  the  fathers  of 
the  large  families  of  our  nation;  they 
pay  more  taxes,  in  proportion  to  their 
possessions,  than  the  man  of  wealth 
who  enjoys  all  the  “moral  comforts”; 
of  which  Mr.  Ditchburn  speaks,  and 
in  time  of  war  they  fight  the  country’s 
battle  and  gain  her  glorious  victories. 
Poets  have  sung  their  praises  and 
kings  have  called  them  “the  salt  of  the: 
earth,”  “nature’s  noblemen,”  and  we 
all  call  them  “the  horny-handed  sons 
of  toil.” 

But  it  has  remained  for  Professor 
Ditchburn  to  say  that  “morality  is 
never  high  where  people  struggle  from 
early  morn  till  far  into  the  night  for 
the  meanest  necessaries  of  life.” 

Truly  would  such  Christian  moral¬ 
ity,  without  religion,  be  much  like  unto 
“The  play  of  Hamlet  with  Hamlet  left 
out.” 

Practical  Examples. 

Washington  and  his  band  of  pa¬ 
triots  left  their  bloodstained  footprints 
in  the  snow  at  Valley  Forge  when 
they  “trudged”  for  their  country’^ 
freedom.  They  lived  on  “hardtack,”' 
"slept  on  their  guns,”  and  had  a  price 
put  on  their  heads  as  traitors.  But,, 
were  they  moral  men?  Lincoln  was 
a  rail-splitter,  common  enough,  in-; 
deed.  Garfield,  our  martyred  Presi¬ 
dent,  drove  muies  on  the  towpath. 
More  slavish  work  he  could  r\ot  find. 
Our  “reigning”  President  Roosevelt 
was  a  rough  rider.  But,  according  to 
Mr.  Ditcliburn’s  morality,  all  these; 
heroes,  martyrs  and  statesmen  were 
not  moral  men. 

.Mr.  Goldsmith  Said: 

“Ill  fares  the  land,  to  hastening  ill  a 
prey, 

Where  wealth  accumulates  and  (poor, 
but  honest)  men  decay.” 

The  Holy  Bible  Says: 

“He  that  will  not  work,  neither  let 
him  eat,”  and,  “Thou  shalt  earn  thy 
bread  in  the  sweat  of  thy  brow.” 

Mr.  Ditchburn  Says: 

“Morality  is  never  hfg*A  where  men 
trudge  from  early  morn  till  far  int<a 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


8€ 

ihe  night  for  the  meanest  necessaries 
of  life,”  and,  again,  he  says:  “There 
is  a  deep  significance  in  the  words 
’poor,  but  honest.’  ”  But,  fortunately, 
we  are  not  obliged  to  believe  him  and 
his  authority  is  limited  to  teaching 
school,  and  his  tenure  of  office  is  very 
'uncertain. 

The  Birth,  Life  and  Death  of  the 
Saviour. 

Every  Christian  knows  that  the 
^‘Saviour  of  Mankind”  was  born  in  a 
stable,  and  that  his  parents  were 
•‘poor,  -but  honest.”  We  know  that  He 
lived  in  the  miserable  little  town  of 
Nazareth.  In  His  public  life  “He  had 
not  whereon  to  lay  His  head.”  He  de¬ 
clared  that  the  birds  and  the  foxes 
were  better  provided  for  than  was  the 
Son  of  Man.  He  was  crucified  by  His 
^enemies.  When  dead  He  was  an  ob¬ 
ject  of  charity  and  interred  in  a  char¬ 
ity  grave  or  tomb. 

Now,  will  Mr.  Ditchburn  say  that 
•‘morality  was  not  high”  in  the  fam¬ 
ily  of  the  Saviour,  who  said  of  Him¬ 
self,  “I  am  the  way  and  the  truth  and 
the  life.” 

Nevertheless,  He  was  born  in  a  sta¬ 
ble,  and  His  parents  were  “poor,  but 
honest,”  and,  says  Mr.  Ditchburn, 
•‘that  is  very  significant.”  It  was 
truly  most  significant  on  the  part  of 
■Our  Blessed  Redeemer,  because  He 
wished  to  teach  by  example  that  true 
and  perfect  morality  which  leads  to 
the  Kingdom  of  His  Father.  His 
coming  and  life  was  to  teach  man  that 
there  is  a  higher  morality  than  eth¬ 
ical  culture,  in  which  the  pagans  glor¬ 
ied,  and  such  as  we  have  today  where 
morality  is  without  the  teaching  of 
Ohrist. 

Yes,  He  came  to  teach  us  that  “the 
life  is  more  than  the  meat,  and  the 
-body  is  more  than  the  raiment,”  and 
that,  “after  all  these  things  do  the 
.heathens  seek.”  He  came  to  tell  us 
<lto  seek  first  the  Kingdom  of  God  and 
His  Glory,”  as  Mr.  Ditchburn  tells  us; 
hut  He  did  more.  He  taught  us  by 
His  life  of  poverty  and  suffering  how5 
to  obtain  that  Kingdom,  and  that  it 
would  profit,  ua  nothing  to  gain  all 
else  and  lose  that  Kingdom. 

•‘Poverty  is  a  Standing  Menace  to  All 
Goodness.” 

The  life  of  the  Redeemer  refutes 
wild  condemns  that  assertion.  So  do 
the  lives  of  the  Apostles  and  Disciples 
who  spread  the  teaching  of  their  Di¬ 
vine  Master. 

If  we  were  to  enter  into  statistics, 
we  could  prove  that  where  the  peo¬ 
ple  are  “poor  but  honest”  they  are 
rthe  most  moral  people  on  the  earth. 

True,  they  may  not  be  refined;  but 
/refinement  is  not  an  essential  to 
Christian  morality.  When  President 


Roosevelt,  and  all  thoughtful  Chris¬ 
tian  men,  raise  their  voices  against 
race  suicide,  their  words  are  not  ad¬ 
dressed  only  to  the  “poor  but  hon¬ 
est  man,”  but  to  those  who  sit  In  high 
places  and  possess  all  the  refinement 
and  comforts  which,  Mr.  Ditchburn 
says,  go  to  make  up  “morality.” 

If  the  Professor  would  know  who 
are  the  real  menace  to  society,  we  may 
be  pardoned  if  we  suggest  to  him  an 
able  article  in  the  “New  York  Inde¬ 
pendent”  of  February  11,  1904,  en¬ 
titled  “The  Real  Enemies  of  Good 
Government,”  and  he  will  find  that 
they  are  not  the  “poor  but  honest” 
men,  but  they  are  the  wealthy  men 
and  corporations,  who  defraud  the 
Government,  bribe  public  officials,  pol¬ 
lute  the  ballot  and  strike  at  the  very 
foundations  of  society. 

The  “poor  but  honest”  man  has  his 
little  possessions  sold  for  a  trifle  of 
tax.  The  wealthy  man  or  corporation 
may  owe  thousands  and  refuse  to 
pay.  The  “poor  but  honest”  man 
serves  a  term  in  the  penitentiary  for 
a  crime  and  the  wealthy  man  often 
defies  the  law  with  impunity,  or 
evades  his  sentence.  And  yet,  Mr. 
Ditchburn  says,  it  is  very  significant 
“to  be  poor  but  honest.” 

“We  are  told,”  says  the  Professor, 
“that  morality  is  not  as  high  as  it 
was.”  It  ought  to  be  higher  and 
louder,  since  we  have  the  telephone 
and  telegraph  and  the  postoffice  and 
daily  press,  with  those  other  modern 
conveniences,  which  he  says  consti¬ 
tute  “morality.” 

Certainly,  morality  will  be  very  high 
when  we  will  communicate  with  our 
neighbors  by  wireless  telegraphy. 
Even  at  the  risk  of  being  numbered 
among  the  “birds  of  ill  omen,”  every 
thoughtful  man  must  confess  that 
there  is  some  cause  for  alarm. 

I  have  read  in  the  press  that  the  last 
census  shows  that  about  50,000,000  of 
people  in  this  country  do  not  attend 
church.  I  have  quoted  above  the 
statement  that  only  one-half  the  chil¬ 
dren  in  this  country  attend  Sunday 
school.  Will  any  sane  Christian  man 
say  there  is  no  cause  for  alarm  in  this 
state  of  affairs?  The  census  for  19  00 
shows  that  there  were  198,914  di¬ 
vorces  in  America  in  ten  years,  and 
that  the  population  increased  20  per 
cent,  and  divorces  60  per  cent.  Is 
not  this  cause  for  alarm?  Every 
council  or  synod  of  the  churches  is 
endeavoring  to  devise  means  to  halt 
this  state  of  affairs.  Statistics  show 
that  77,613  persons  committed  sui¬ 
cide  from  1891-1904,  and  the  most 
shocking  feature  was  that  2  0,4  00 
were  women;  and  worse  still,  c'ven 
hundreds  of  children  are  among  the 
number!!! 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


3? 


For  several  years  Mr.  George  P. 
Upton,  of  tne  Chicago  Trioune,  has 
been  an  acknowledged  authority  as  to 
statistics  on  suicide  and  lynching.  But 
what  avails  Mr.  Upton’s  statistics, 
when  the  Professor  from  Tamaqua 
says  that  only  “birds  of  ill  omen’' 
“scent  the  danger  at  a  distance,”  and 
In  the  same  paper  tells  us  that  we  have 
not  prisons  enough  to  hold  our  crim¬ 
inals  if  they  were  all  in  jail?  “Tell  it 
not  in  Gath,  good  man.” 

The  New  York  Independent  of 
April  14,  19  04,  says:  “Benjamin 

Franklin  said  that  eight  was  the  Am¬ 
erican  average  family  two  centuries 
ago,  and  liguring  on  that  basis,  fore¬ 
saw  for  this  country  a  population  of 
100,000,000  by  1900.  Instead  we 
have  76.000,000,  of  whom  11,000,000 
are  foreign  born,  and  13,000,000  are 
the  children  of  foreign  born  parents. 
Only  52,000,000,  or  a  trifle  over  half 
the  number  Franklin  predicted,  have, 
therefore,  descended  from  the  early 
American  stock” 

The  lamentable  cause  may  be  found 
in  divorce  and  race  suicide.  The  au- 
thoiities  at  Washington  tell  us  that 
the  percentage  of  increase  in  popula¬ 
tion  is  decreasing  yearly.  But  Mr. 
Ditchburn  tells  us  that  only  “birds  of 
ill  omen”  see  cause  for  alarm. 

“The  Churchman”  of  April  9,  1904, 
commenting  on  the  rapid  increase  in 
divorce  in  recent  years,  says  editor¬ 
ially:  “This  is  a  dreadful  record,  and 
reveals  a  condition  that  must  be  ab¬ 
horrent  to  every  right-minded  citizen. 
But  it  will  require  something  more 
than  abhorrence  to  remove  the  stain 
from  American -life.  That  the  condi¬ 
tion  is  felt  to  be  a  stain  upon  the  Na¬ 
tional  honor  and  the  responsibility  for 
it  weighs  heavily  upon  tne  Na¬ 
tional  conscience  is  shown  by  the 
wide  demand  made  upon  Congress  for 
a  National  divorce  law.  But  the  evil 
lies  too  deep  to  be  remedied  by  mere 
legislation.  The  sin  is  a  social  sin, 
and  social  forces  must  be  aroused  be¬ 
fore  any  legi.^lative  action  would  be 
effective.” 

Yes,  the  moral  conscience  must 
be  aroused,  and  that  can  be  done 
by  religion  only,  and  that  impressed 
on  the  moral  conscience  from  infancy. 

The  Christian  President  of  our  coun¬ 
try  has  raised  his  voice  from  his  seat 
of  authority  and  sent  forth  loud  and 
frequent  condemnations  of  the  awrful 
crime  of  “race  suicide.”  We  do  not 
realize  what  it  means.  The  guilty 
parties  are  not  brought  before  our 
courts  and  imprisoned,  it  is  true,  but, 
nevertheless,  the  woeful  effects  are 
present  to  the  State  and  to  society. 

Dr.  H.  H.  Seys,  health  officer,  of 
Springfield,  Ohio,  tells  us:  “Weil  may 
those  who  hope  for  the  welfare  of  this 
great  Republic  shudder  at  race  sui¬ 


cide.  The  birth  rate  is  not  larger  than 
it.  was  a  number  of  3rears  ago,  while- 
the  population  of  the  city  is  much 
greater.  The  net  gains  of  births  over 
deaths  for  the  year  is  only  218,  and 
the  birth  rate  17.45  per  thousand.” 

With  reluctance  I  refer  to  barbarous? 
atrocities  that  take  place  from  time  to 
time  in  our  country.  I  mean  the  sav¬ 
agery  that  takes  possession  of  civ¬ 
ilized  men  in  this  age  of  “broad  mor¬ 
ality”  and  enlightment,  when  they  lead 
forth  their  fellow  citizen,  “for  whose 
life  and  liberty  the  nation  almost 
died,”  and  burn  him  at  the  stake 
whilst  they  look  on  with  fiendish  glee 
and  fight  for  a  relic  of  their  human* 
sacrifice. 

Plato  tells  us  in  his  “Ideal  Republic”: 
“It  is  the  mark  of  a  gentleman  to  have 
a  community  of  wives,  to  destroy 
superfluous  children,  and  to  show  a 
contempt  for  the  poor  and  the  foreign-, 
ers.”  Is  our  morality  coming  to  this? 

Chicago’s  Pagans. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  James  Stone,  rector 
of  St.  James’  Episcopal  church,  the 
membership  of  which  is  reported  to 
be  largely  made  up  of  wealthy  per¬ 
sons,  caused  comment  when  in  a  ser¬ 
mon  last  Sunday,  January  29th,  1904,. 
he  denounced  the  rich  of  Chicago.  He- 
said:  “There  are  many  exceptions,., 
noble  and  praiseworthy,  for  which 
wre  thank  God  and  take  courage.  But 
for  the  greater  part,  the  people  of 
financial  and  social  influence  in  Chi¬ 
cago,  the  people  who  could,  if  they; 
w'ould,  do  so  much  for  the  salvation  ^ 
of  the  city,  the  people  that  are  going 
to  suffer  the  most  in  the  terrible  con¬ 
flict  between  the  classes  that  is  threat¬ 
ening  this  country,  the  nearness  of 
which  seems  apparent,  the  centre  of 
which  will  be  this  very  city,  the  end 
of  which  no  man  knows — these  peo¬ 
ple  w'ho  should  be  the  first  in  Chris¬ 
tian  example  and  in  every  good  work 
are  living  the  lives  of  pagans,  nice 
pagans  if  you  will,  but  assuredly  pa¬ 
gans.” 

Justice  Brewrer,  of  the  U.  S.  Supreme 
Court,  said  in  his  address  at  Chicago, 
on  March  29,  1904:  “No  one  of  our 
large  cities  is  filled  with  people  of  & 
single  race.  Not  only  is  your  foreign 
population  enormous,  but  it  is  made 
up,  not  from  a  single  race,  but  from 
many.  It  is  the  most  cosmopolitan 
city  on  the  continent.  There  is 
scarcely  a  race  on  the  face  of  the 
globe  that  is  not  here  represented,  and 
many  by  multitudes.  I  remember 
hearing  one  boast  that  Chicago  had 
more  Irish  in  its  midst  than  any  city  . 
in  Ireland,  save  Dublin  and  Cork; 
more  Poles  than  any  city  in  Poland; 
more  Germans  than  any  city  of  Ger¬ 
many,  other  than  Berlin  and  Munich, 
and  so  he  w?ent  on  until  I  felt  con- 


SS 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


strained  to  interrupt  by  saying:  ‘And 
doubtless  more  saints  and  sinners  than 
anv  place  in  the  universe  save  heaven 
and  hell.’  ” 

Another  evil  at  which  all  thought¬ 
ful  men  may  rightly  feel  alarmed  is 
Socialism.  With  its  tenets  we  are  not 
well  acquainted,  but,  W.  S.  Kress,  of 
Cleveland,  Ohio,  says,  in  the  “Eccles¬ 
iastical  Review”  for  March,  1904:  “The 
Socialist  Party  publishes  more  than 
200  weekly  papers  in  this  country,  and 
has  an  army  laboring  with  frantic  zeal 
to  spread'  their  faith.  Their  teaching 
sets  one  class  of  citizens  against  an¬ 
other;  it  unsettles  and  cripples  busi¬ 
ness,  derides  love  of  country,  aims  at 
the  complete  overthrow  of  our  pres¬ 
ent  political  system,  advocates  the 
confiscation  of  ail  land  and  active  cap¬ 
ital.  ‘without  one  cent  of  compensa¬ 
tion.’  ” 

Is  it  any  wonder,  then,  that  the 
thoughtful  Christian  men  of  our  coun¬ 
try,  only  a  few  of  whom  are  quoted 
above,  raise  their  voice  and  cry  out 
for  some  concerted  action  on  the  part 
of  Church  and  State,  whereby  to  coun¬ 
teract  the  ravages  that  the  foregoing 
state  of  affairs  is  working  on  society 
and  on  our  Nation?  And  what  are  the 
remedies  they  would  apply  and  the 
antidote  they  would  prescribe? 

In  their  concern  for  the  future  they 
base  their  hopes  on  religion.  They  all 
proclaim  that  if  we  are  to  be  saved 
from  heathen  vices  we  must  begin 
with  the  child,  and  not  only  teach  the 
head  and  hand,  but  also  educate  the 
heart  and  impress  on  the  young  mind 
that  “the  fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  be¬ 
ginning  of  wisdom,”  and  that  there  is 
a  law  higher  then  the  law  of  the 
land  that  demands  our  respect;  that 
there  is  a  tribunal  higher  than  our 
civil  courts  before  which  we  shall  be 
Judged,  and  that  the  sentence  of  that 
higher  court  can  neither  be  evaded 
nor  anticipated,  but  will  he  final  and 
for  eternity.  Will  any  one  say  that 
the  men  who  make  such  an  appeal  are 
“birds  of  ill  omen.”  croaks  and  de¬ 
tainers? 

Bie  Not  More  “Stately”  Than  the  State. 

The  State  fully  realizes  all  this. 
The  exercises  of  our  State  Legislature 
and  Congress  and  Senate  are  opened 
by  a  Christian  minister  with  a  peti¬ 
tion  to  the  God  of  Nations  for  light,  or 
thanksgiving  for  light  received.  The 
Government  sends  chaplains  with  our 
Army  and  Navy.  And  for  what  pur¬ 
pose?  Assuredly  not  to  teach  them 
only  the  “morality”  which  deals  with 
the  refinements  of  life,  but  to  teach 
them  that,  whilst  they  must  be  pre¬ 
pared  to  give  their  lives  for  their  coun¬ 
try,  there  is  also  a  Ruler  who  has  a 
claim  on  their  spiritual  allegiance,  for 
lime  and  eternity. 


The  State  goes  further,  and  appoint* 
in  our  State  institutions,  not  chaplains, 
but  “moral  instructors.”  She  follows 
even  those  who  have  abused  her  con¬ 
fidence  and  violated  her  most  sacred 
laws,  into  the  prison  cells.  Although 
she  deprives  them  of  their  liberty  for 
the  good  of  society,  she  does  not  de¬ 
prive  them  of  that  moral  consolation 
which  is  based  on  religion,  and  by 
which  religious  moral  training  she 
hopes  to  reform  and  make  a  better 
citizen  of  the  convict. 

Mr.  Joseph  Welch,  “moral  instruc¬ 
tor”  at  the  Eastern  Penitentiary,  Phil¬ 
adelphia,  says  in  his  annual  report 
for  1902:  “Our  religious  services  are 
well  sustained  with  the  assistance  of 
the  local  Preachers’  Association  of  this 
city,  and  ministers  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  City  Mission.”  These  relig¬ 
ious  gentlemen  are  certainly  not  en¬ 
gaged  in  teaching  the  prisoners  how  to 
conduct  themselves  at  a  “pink  tea,”  or 
how  to  obtain  admission  to  the  “Cob- 
den  Club,”  but,  rather,  that  “the  fear 
of  the  Lord  is  the  beginning  of  wis¬ 
dom.” 

The  State  even  engages  a  “moral  in¬ 
structor”  for  those  who  have  lost  the 
use  of  reason.  This  Christian  gentle¬ 
man  goes  among  the  patients,  engages 
them  in  conversation,  and,  when  he 
discovers  a  lqcid  interval,  he  elevates 
their  thoughts  by  speaking  to  them 
about  the  love  of  God,  the  joys  of 
Paradise,  the  sufferings  of  the  Re¬ 
deemer,  the  eternal  reward  for  being 
virtuous  and  punishment  for  doing 
evil.  And  it  cannot  be  denied  but 
that  he  accomplishes  much,  whether 
with  the  convict  or  simple-minded  in¬ 
sane.  - 

In  theory  the  State  teaches  no  relig¬ 
ion,  we  concede;  but  the  above  “re¬ 
port”  from  her  “moral  instructor”  of 
the  Eastern  Penitentiary  tells  us  what 
she  does  in  practice.  And  it  is  well 
that  she  does  so. 

“The  Important  Point.” 

If  the  State,  then,  Mr.  Editor,  just¬ 
ly  endeavors  by  morality,  based  on  re¬ 
ligion,  to  elevate  those  who  have  fall¬ 
en,  and  to  soften  those  who  have  be¬ 
come  hardened,  to  make  moral  and 
religious,  those  who  have  become  im¬ 
moral  and  ungodly,  is  it  expecting  too 
much  when  thoughtful  men  of  every 
denomination  ask  the  State  to  assist 
in  the  religious  moral  training  of  the 
child?  We  try  to  reform  the  prisoner. 
Why  not  use  every  effort,  to  stamp  on 
the  young  heart  those  religious  and 
moral  principles  that  may  keep  the 
child  ii-  alter  life  from  becoming  a 
prisoner? 

We  watch  and  wait  for  the  moment 
when  we  may  speak  of  heaven,  and 
Jtf'ms,  and  God  Our  Father,  to  the 
one  who  is  mildly  insane.  Why. 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LA  BOR 


59 


should  not  the  State,  at  least,  assist 
in  Impressing  on  the  young  heart  that, 
“virtue  is  her  own  reward,”  and  that 
he  who  runs  into  the  grosser  vices, 
transgresses  the  laws  of  nature,  and 
nature’s  God,  will  be  punished  here 
below,  often  by  the  loss  of  reason, 
certainly  by  the  loss  of  health,  and 
hereafter  by  God,  the  giver  of  health 
and  reason! 

This  is  neither  philosophy  nor  rev¬ 
elation.  It  is  simply  what  we  prac¬ 
tice  and  preach  in  the  most  ordinary 
affairs  of  life.  How  often  we  hear 
those  homely  savings:  “A  stitch  in 
time  saves  nine,”  and  “It  is  useless  to 
lcck  the  stable  when  the  horse  is 
stolen,”  and  wTe  are  told:  “That  an 
ounce  of  prevention  is  worth  more 
than  a  pound  of  cure!” 

Very  Rev.  Thomas  Bouquillon,  D. 
D.,  said:  “Substantial  food,  pure  air, 
sanitary  dwellings,  favor  the  physical 
development  of  a  people.  But  chastity 
and  austerity  favor  it  much  more. 
Famine  and  pest  account  for  the  de¬ 
cay  of  few  nations;  debauchery  and 
immorality  account  for  many.  Leprosy, 
when  most  frightful,  never  counted  as 
many  victims  as  diseases  resulting 
from  immoral  living  claim  to-day.” 

But  you  immediately  say,  will  not  an 
ethical  culture,  which  develops  a 
knowledge  of  our  dignity,  a  self  re¬ 
spect,  a  love  of  health  arid  life,  a  re¬ 
gard  for  the  respect  of  our  fellow  man 
and  a  sense  of  our  duty  to  family  and 
society  in  general,  be  sufficient  to 
cause  upright  men  to  spurn  every 
temptation  to  a  life  that  would  pro¬ 
duce  such  sad  results? 

We  say  with  Rev.  Wm.  Dyer,  of 
Cambridgeport,  Mass.:  “There  must 
be  some  higher  motive  for  a  moral 
life,  and  that  motive  must  be  relig¬ 
ion,  the  recognition  of  a  Supreme  Law-  • 
giver,  wrhose  will  alone  can  give  to 
laws  their  binding  force  upon  man’s 
■conscience.  Eliminate  religion  from 
your  moral  teaching  and  you  cannot 
■find  such  a  motite.  You  may  suggest 
to  youths  motives  of  utility;  you  may 
show  them  the  advantage  of  acting 
rightly,  you  may  tell  them  to  be 
truthful  and  honest,  for  example,  be¬ 
cause  in  the  end  they  will  be  better 
■off,  since  bars  nun  thieves  sooner  or 
later  come  to  grief.” 

“They  will  believe  you  as  long  as 
■utility  is  the  only  motive  they  know 
for  the  practice  of  virtue:  thev  will 
:not  be  illogical,  and  you  cannot  blame 
them  if  they  find  more  immediate, 
practical  utility  in  lying  and  stealing. 
You  may  tell  them  how  much  more 
pleasant  life  will  be  if  they  follow 
your  good  advice;  there  is  hardly  a 
boy  alive  who  will  not  consider  that 
for  himself  there  w  11  be  an  immense- 
'hr  greater  pleasure  in  doing  the  oppo¬ 


site.  You  may  show  them,  the  beauty 
of  certain  actions  and  their  fitness  to 
the  ideal  humanity.  Either  they  will 
not  understand  you  or  they  will  con¬ 
clude  that  it  is  more  in  harmony 
with  the  conditions  of  their  concrete 
humanity  to  do  what  you  condemn.” 

“The  practical  way  to  train  children 
to  lead  virtuous  lives  is  the  old  way — 
the  way  that  teaches  them  that  ‘the 
fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  beginning  of 
wisdom.’  They  must  be  taught  from 
earliest  years  that  the  practice  of  vir¬ 
tue  is  a  duty  imposed  by  law  on  their 
free  will,  and  this  law  is  promul¬ 
gated  by  an  authority  that  has  a  right 
to  command  their  free  will,  and, 
moreover,  has  the  power  to  enforce 
that  command.  To  offer  motives  of 
pleasure,  utility,  moral  beauty  and  fit¬ 
ness  is  not  to  announce  a  law;  and 
where  there  is  no  law  there  is  no  ob¬ 
ligation.  When  we  leave  out  of  eth¬ 
ical  teaching,  God  and  His  lawr,  man’s 
immortality  and  his  accountability  tc 
his  Creator,  we  can  give  our  pupils  no 
motive  that  will  have  strength  enough 
in  it  to  influence  their  conduct  for 
good.” 

We  justly  endeavor  to  train  our 
children  to  be  patriotic  in  the  hign- 
est  degree.  But  would  it  not  be  profit¬ 
able  to  the  State  to  teach,  or  assist 
in  teaching,  them,  not  only  patriot¬ 
ism,  but  also  religious  morality?  Let 
us  not  close  our  eyes  to  the  facts  of 
history:  That  “the  nation  and  people 
— the  most  gallant  and  accomplished 
of  all  antiquity — who  engraved  their 
names  on  the  imperishable  fields  of 
Piataea  and  Marathon,  who  con¬ 
quered  at  Salamis  or  died  at  Thermop¬ 
ylae — that  carried  eloquence,  hero¬ 
ism  and  art  to  a  pitch  never  since  at¬ 
tained — the  age  which  boasted  of 
Pericles  and  Praxitelles,  of  Plato  and 
Aristides,  perished  from  its  excess  of 
material  civilization,  deprived,  as  it 
was,  of  the  vital  elements  of  true  re- 
ligion.” 

Conclusion. 

I  beg  to  assure  you,  Mr.  Editor,  that 
not  one  word  of  all  that  has  been  said 
is  either  intended  as  a  criticism  of  our 
public  schools  or  as  the  expression  of 
an  opinion  that  religion  ought  to  be 
taught  in  our  public  schools.  That 
matter  will  be  settled  in  the  right 
time  and  in  the  right  way  by  the  fair- 
minded,  far-seeing  American  states¬ 
men  and  churchmen. 

What  has.  been  said  was  merely  to 
showr  to  what  extent  and  among  what 
denominations  parish  schools  are  sus¬ 
tained,  or  encouragea,  arm  to  snow, 
to  some  extent,  wrho  have  spoken  and 
what  they  have  said  in  regard  to  our 
public  school  system. 


49 


IX  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


As  for  the  rest,  Mr,  Editor.  I  beg 
to  assure  you  and  your  multitude  of 
readers  that  I  have  no  desire  to  see  the 
State  undertake  to  teach  religion  in 
our  public  schools,  because  the  dog¬ 
matic  differences  in  religious  convic¬ 
tions  are  so  many  that  they  cannot 
be  reconciled,  to  such  a  degree,  as  to 
satisfy  all  concerned  and  have  relig¬ 
ion  taught  at  public  expense.  Nor  do 
I  speak  in  favor  of  this  or  that  sys¬ 
tem  of  religious  education.  But,  as 
a  citizen,  with  a  love  for  our  glorious 
country,  and  as  a  minister  of  the 
Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  with  a  duty 
to  perform  for  His  Master,  I  join  with 
all  those  whom  I  have  ouoted  above, 
and  the  hundreds  who  have  spoken 
and  are  not  quoted,  in  saying,  that  it 
is  full  time  for  all  lovers  of  morality 
founded  on  religion  to  come  together 


and  devise  some  means  whereby  the- 
youth  of  our  land  may  he  educated 
in  a  knowledge  of  God  their  Creator, 
as  well  as  in  things  secular.  And  in 
(hese  religious  and  patriotic  convic* 
tions  I  am  willing  to  stand  or  fall  inj- 
the  company  of  the  Father  of  His* 
Country,  the  Immortal  George;  in  the 
company  of  our  martyred  McKinley. ' 
whose  last  words  were,  “Nearer,  m;-; 
God,  to  Thee;’’  in  company  of  ou»- 
present  Christian  President,  Roose¬ 
velt,  who  is  crying  forth  with  all  the- 
power  vested  in  his  exalted  position 
against  the  race  suicide  which  is  de¬ 
populating  our  land,  and  who  said,  as 
above  quoted:  “It  is  a  good  thing  to 
be  clever  and  smart,  but  it  is  a  better 
thing  to  have  the  qualities  that  find 
their  expression  in  the  Decalogue  and 
the  Golden  Rule.” 


6— A  Bit  of  History  of  Education  That  Educates 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  PUBLIC  SCHOOLS. 

The  manner  in  which  some  people, 
outside  the  Catholic  Church,  talk  of 
our  free  school  system  is  very  apt  to 
be  misleading  in  some  respects.  The 
class  to  which  we  refer  is.  no  doubt, 
fully  convinced  that  the  public  school 
system  is  a  natural  product  of  mod¬ 
ern  times. 

The  following  exi.act  from  a  book 
entitled,  “National  Education  in 
Europe,”  by  Henry  Barnard,  BL.D., 
will  prove  enlightening  to  some  and 
of  interest  to  all: 

“But  not  to  Germany  or  any  other 
people,  or  any  civil  authority  any¬ 
where,  but  to  the  Christian  Church, 
belongs  the  higher  credit  of  first  insti¬ 
tuting  the  public  school  for  the  ele¬ 
mentary  education  of  the  poor,  which 
was  the  earliest  form  which  this 
mighty  element  of  modern  society  as¬ 
sumed.  After  the  third  century  of  the 
Christian  era,  whenever  a  Christian 
Church  was  planted,  or  religions  were 
established,  there  it  was  the  aim  of 
the  higher  ecclesiastical  authorities 
to  found,  in  some  form,  a  school  for 
the  nature  of  children  and  youth,  for 
the  service  of  religion  and  duties  of 
society'.  Passing  by  the  ecclesiastical 
and  catechetical  schools,  we  find,  as 
early  as  529,  the  Council  of  Vaison 
strongly  recommending  the  establish¬ 
ment  of  village  schools.  In  8  00  a 
Synod  at  Mayence  ordered  that  the 
parochial  priests  should  have  schools 
In  the  towns  and  villages,  that  the 
children  of  all  the  faithful  might  learn 
letters  from  them:  ‘Bet  them  receive 
and  teach  these  with  the  utmost  char¬ 


ity,  that  they  themselves  may  shin* 
as  the  stars  forever.  Bet  them  re¬ 
ceive  no  remuneration  from  their 
scholars,  unless  what  the  parents  may 
voluntarily  offer.’  ” 

A  Council  at  Rome,  in  8  36,  under 
Pope  Eugene  II,  ordered  that  there 
should  be  three  kinds  of  schools  es¬ 
tablished  through  Christendom — epis¬ 
copal,  parochial  in  towns  and  villages,, 
and  others  wherever  there  could  be- 
found  place  and  opportunity. 

In  836  Bothaire  I  promulgated  a  de¬ 
cree  to  establish  light  public  schools 
in  some  of  the  principal  cities  of 
Italy:  “In  order  that  opportunity  may 
be  given  to  all,  and  that  there  may 
be  no  excuse  drawn  from  poverty  and' 
the  difficulty  of  repairing  to  remote: 
places.” 

The  Third  Council  of  Bateran,  117  9,. 
says:  “Since  the  Church  of  God,  as  a* 
pious  mother,  is  bound  to  provide  thaf 
opportunity  should  not  be  withdrawn 
from  the  poor,  who  are  without  help 
from  patrimonial  riches,  be  it  or¬ 
dained,  that  in  every  cathedral  there 
should  be  a  master  to  teach  both, 
clerks  and  poor  scholars  gratis.” 

This  decree  was  enlarged  and  again* 
enforced  by  Innocent  III,  in  the  year 
1215.  Hence,  in  all  colleges  oi 
canons  one  bore  the  title  of  the  schol¬ 
astic  canon.  The  Council  of  Byons,  in- 
1215,  decreed  that  “In  all  cathedral 
churches  and  others  provided  with 
adequate  revenues,  there  should  be 
established  a  school  and  a  teacher  by 
the  Bishop  and  Chapter,  who  should 
teach  the  clerks  and  other  poor  schol- 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  07  LABOR 


1  £ 


ars  gratis  in  grammar,  and  for  this 
purpose  a  stipend  should  be  assigned 
him.” 

Such  was  the  origin  of  t lie  popular 
school,  as  new  generally  understood 
—everywhere  the  offspring  and  com¬ 
panion  of  the  Church.” 

Ue  Founded  America's  First  Primary 
School. 

Says  the  “Leader.”  of  San  Fran¬ 
cisco:  “In  the  town  of  Texcoco,  across 
the  lake  of  the  same  name,  from  the 
City  of  Mexico,  a  remarkable  monu¬ 
ment  is  soon  to  be  erected.  It  will 
not  be  pretentious,  but  will  commem¬ 
orate  the  founder  of  tlie  first  primary 
school  on  the  American  continent. 
His  name  was  Father  Gante.  a  native 
of  Flanders,  and  better  known  in 
Mexican  history  as  Brother  Peter  of 
Ghent.  This  Franciscan  Friar  estab¬ 
lished  a  school  in  Texcoco  a  hundred 
years  before  any  institution  of  the 
same  kind  arose  in  the  present  terri¬ 
tory  of  the  United  States.  As  a  friend 
of  the  Indians,  the  name  of  Father 
Gante  is  second  only  to  that  of  the 
illustrious  and  saintly  Bishop  Les 
Casas.” 

A  Useful  Report. 

From  “Sacred  Heart  Review,”  April 
23rd,  1904: 

From  the  report  of  the  Fifth  Annual 
Conference  of  the  Association  of  Cath¬ 
olic  Colleges  of  the  United  States,  held 
in  Philadelphia,  Oct.  28-29,  in  1903, 
we  quote  part  .  of  Bishop  Conaty’s 
striking  address  at  the  public  meeting 
held  in  the  high  school  auditorium: 
“Time  was,  sixty  years  ago,”  the  Bish¬ 
op  said,  “when  the  foundation  stones 
were  laid  of  the  great  public  school 
system,  that  men  were  promised  that 
by  the  general  education  of  the  peo¬ 
ple  crime  would  cease,  happiness 
would  come  into  human  lives,  the  pan¬ 
acea  for  all  ills  Would  be  found,  and 
we  were  to  grow  into  a  people  of 
knowledge,  and,  through  knowledge, 
of  virtue.  *  *  *  Sixty  years  have 

passed;  education  is  more  general  here 
than  in  any  part  of  the  world.  What 
lias  become  of  crime,  of  the  unrest  of 
of  society,  of  the  conflict  between  the 
rich  and  the  poor,  capital  and  labor? 
*  *  *  Thinking  men  are  aghast, 

and  are  wondering  what  the  outcome 
will  be.  Bribery,  fraud,  defalcation, 
divorce,  moral  irresponsibility,  ab¬ 
sence  of  any  thought  of  the  spiritual, 
crimes  of  intelligent  people  stagger 
the  men  of  affairs,  break  the  confi¬ 
dence  of  man  in  man,  lay  the  founda¬ 
tion  of  ruin  in  the  home,  separate  the 
parent  and  the  child,  destroy  all  re¬ 
spect  for  authority.  Is  it  the  result  of 
illiteracy?  Not  at  all;  it  seems  to  he 


the  outcome  of  intellectual  develop¬ 
ment.  These  are  not  the  crimes  of  ig¬ 
norant  men  and  women;  they  are  the 
crimes  of  what  people  call  educated 
society,  and  they  are  crimes  that 
knock  the  foundation  from  under  so¬ 
ciety  altogether. 

“What  is  the  reason  of  it  all?  Why 
not  ask  the  cause?  The  cause  is  not 
in  education;  it  is  in  a  mistaken  idea 
of  what  education  ought  to  do;  it  is* 
in  the  divorce  of  religion  from  educa¬ 
tion,  for  when  you  have  taken  religion 
out  of  public  institutions  you  have 
taken  the  very  soul  out  of  its  life,  its 
guiding  star,  the  only  thing  that  can 
control,  make  responsibility,  and  force 
responsibility  to  do  its  duty.  Where 
men  are  brought  up  without  con¬ 
science,  look  out  for  their  dangerous, 
crimes.  *  *  *  Our  American  citi¬ 

zenship  is  established  and  preserved 
in  the  children  who  are  not  allowed 
to  forget  that  God  is  the  Ruler  of  na¬ 
tions  and  the  Creator  of  the  individ¬ 
ual.” 

To  these  stirring  remarks  we  would 
add  the  following,  from  Monsignor- 
Loughlin : 

“I  do  believe  that  one-half  the  abuse 
heaped  upon  our  (parish)  schools  is 
caused  by  envy.  There  is  not  a  min¬ 
ister  who  reviles  the  system  who- 
would  not  give  his  eye-tooth  to  have 
a  school  as  good  as  the  Nativity 
School,  for  instance,  in  the  city  of 
Philadelphia.  *  *  *  Remember 

the  words  of  our  Holy  Father,  Pius 
X.  He  says  it  is  useless  to  think  of' 
drawing  people  to  God  by  a  bitter  zeal.. 
That  is  a  watchword  that  should  sink 
strongly  into  our  hearts.  It  would  be 
a  blessing  to  this  country  if  both  Cath¬ 
olics  and  Protestants  would  lay  aside 
bitterness,  and  it  is  our  duty  to  give 
the  good  example.  If  there  is  any 
gentleman  here  present  who  is  not  a 
Catholic.  I  would  ask  him  to  recog¬ 
nize  this  fact:  Up  to  the  present  time 
there  has  been  on  the  part  of  those 
who  had  most  to  do  with  the  public 
system  a  tendency  to  ignore  the  Cath¬ 
olic  school,  hut  how  can  you  ignore 
a  system  in  which  millions  of  our 
children  are  being  educated?  *  *  * 

Let  us  lay  aside  all  bitterness,  and 
take  every  opportunity  to  show  our 
fellow  citizens  that  it  is  not  in  anger 
that  we  have  objected  to  their  system, 
hut  through  the  experience  of  thous¬ 
ands  of  years,  and  through  a  logic  that, 
can  not  be  gainsaid.” 

A  Reply  to  Dr.  Harris. 

From  “Sacred  Heart  Review,”  April* 
23rd,  1904: 

The  Rev.  Timothy  Brosnahan,  S.  J.. 
replies,  in  a  noticeable  pamphlet  oc 
thirty-one  pages,  to  Dr.  William  T.x 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


<2 


Harris,  United  States  Commissioner  of 
Education,  who,  at  the  Annual  Con¬ 
vention  of  the  National  Educational 
Association  held  in  Boston  July,  1902. 
■tread  a  paper  entitled  “The  Separation 
of  the  Church  from  Schools  Supported 
by  Public  Taxes.”  Of  this  paper 
Father  Brosriahan  declares:  “There  is 
scarcely  a.  distinct  proposition  in  it 
that  could  not  be  safely  challenged  by 
a.ny  educated  Catholic.  But  the  tun- 
damental  proposition  on  which  his 
whole  contention  rests  is.  that  instruc¬ 
tion  in  secular  knowledge  is  of  its 
■‘Very  nature  so  antagonistic  to  relig¬ 
ious  instruction  as  to  render  the  com¬ 
munication  of  both  in  the  same 
school  an  impossibility.  *  *  *  I 

shall  endeavor  to  make  it  clear,  that 
the  fundamental  proposition  of  Dr. 
Harris  is  wholly  untenable;  that  there 
is  no  necessary  opposition  between 
secular  and  religious  instruction:  that 
In  fact  education  without  religious  in¬ 
struction  is  wrong  m  principle  and 
disastrous  in  result.”  We  strongly 
commend  this  able  pamphlet  by  Fath¬ 
er  Brosnahan  to  all  teachers,  Catholic 
•or  non-Catholic,  in  schools  of  every 
kind  and  grade.  Its  drift  may  be  in¬ 
ferred  from  the  following  quotation: 

“Even  in  the  lower  evolution  of  civ¬ 
ilization  effected  by  commerce  and  in¬ 
dustry  the  most  clear-sighted  econo¬ 
mists  hold  that  religion  has  been  one 
•of  the  greatest  formative  agencies  in 
the  world's  history.  Mr.  M.  L.  Price, 
in  a  recent  book,  expresses  the  pres¬ 
ent  drift  of  economic  thought.  ‘Here 
•and  there.’  he  says,  ‘the  ardor  of  the 
militaiy  or  artistic  spirit  hus  been  for 
a  time  predominant;  but  religious  and 
economic  influences  have  nowhere 
been  displaced  from  the  front  rank 
even  for  a  time,  and  they  have  nearly 
■  always  been  more  important  than  all 
the  others  put  together.’  *  *  *  In¬ 

dications  are  not  wanting  that,  as  the 
"Brooklyn  Eagle’  said,  about  a  year 
and  a  half  ago:  ‘We  are  within  meas¬ 
urable  distance  of  the  time  when  so¬ 
ciety  may  for  its  own  sake  go  on  its 
knees  to  any  factor  which  can  be  war¬ 
ranted  to  make  education  compatible 
with  and  inseparable  from  morality. 
We  are  confident  that  there  are  brains 
and  will-power  enough  in  the  coun¬ 
try  to  devise  a  plan  by  w'hich  our  pub¬ 
lic  school  system,  while  retaining  its 
essential  character,  will  be  adapted  to 
the  production  of  the  real  type  of  Am¬ 
erican  citizenship — a  man  of  trained 
mind,  of  personal  business  and  civic 
enterprise  and  integrity,  of  high  moral 
and  religious  ideals.’  ” 

Sectarian  Schools. 

The  following  is  taken  from  “The 
Annual  Report  of  Parish  Schools  in 
tihe  City  of  New  York  ior 


To  the  Editor  of  the  New  York  Times: 

Very  many  of  your  readers  have 
been  pained  by  an  editorial  that  ap¬ 
peared  in  your  issue  of  April  2  2  on 
the  subject  of  “Sectarian  Schools.” 
Throughout  the  article  it  seems  to  be 
assumed  that  the  public  schools  are 
non -sectarian.  This  word  “non-sec¬ 
tarian.”  as  applied  to  institutions,  had 
been  used  in  such  a  loose  way  that 
many  have  come  to  think  that  it 
means  an  institution  .that  is  not  os¬ 
tensibly  Protestant.  Catholic,  or  Jew- 
ish.  1  would  not  wish  to  think  that 
one  so  scholarly  as  a  Times  editor 
would  so  use  the  word.  What  is  a 
non -sectarian  school?  Certainly  it  is 
any  school  that  is  not  directed  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  principles  of  any  sect, 
whether  religious  or  irreligious — for 
we  have  irreligious  sects,  like  the  Ag¬ 
nostics  and  Indifferentists,  quite  as 
well  as  religious  sects,  like  the  Pres¬ 
byterians  or  MeJhodists. 

Is  a  non-sectarian  school  possible? 
Let  us  see.  Either  the  school  admits 
in  its  teaching  that  God  exists  or  that 
He  does  not  exist,  or  that  it  does  not 
know  whether  He  exists  or  not.  If  it 
admits  that  He  exists,  then  it  is  the- 
istic;  if  it  supposes  that  He  does  not 
exist,  then  it  is  atheistic;  if  it  pro¬ 
fesses  not  to  know  whecner  He  exists 
or  not,  then.it  is  agnostic.  We  will  go 
a  step  further.  The  ideas  directing 
the  school  admit  either  that  God  has 
made  a  revelation,  or  deny  a  revela¬ 
tion,  or  hold  that  thty  do  not  know, 
or  that  they  do  not  care,  whether 
there  is  a  revelation,  or  that  they  will 
have  nothing  to  say  on  the  question, 
and  leave  the  pupils  to  think  as  they 
please  of  it. 

In  every  one  of  these  cases  the 
school  is  still  “sectarian,”  and  the 
principles  advocated  determine  the 
school  and  put  it  in  accord  with  a 
particular  set  or  sect  which  advocates 
ihese  principles.  There  may  be  no 
name  yet  invented  for  the  sect  of 
men  who  advocate  the  particular 
principle  involved,  but  since  there 
must  be  a  principle  at  the  root  of 
every  school  system  that  system  be¬ 
comes  allied  to  the  sect  advocating 
the  principle. 

Now,  are  our  public  schools  influ¬ 
enced  by  the  principles  of  any  sect? 
Most  certainly  they  are.  They  are  in¬ 
fluenced  by  the  principles  of  the  sect 
which  wishes  to  have  school  without 
any  religious  instructio'n.  You  may 
remembe.  the*-  *ur  great  statesman, 
Daniel  W'ebster,  gave  his  opinion  of 
such  schools  in  his  famouc  speech  in 
the  Girard  case.  He  said: 

“It  is  o  mockery  and  an  insult  to 
common  sense  to  maintain  that 
school  for  the  instruction  of  youth 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


42 


HFrom  which  Christian  instruction  by 
Christian  teachers  is  sedulously  and 
'religiously  shut,  out,  is  not  deistie  and 
'Infidel  both  in  its  purpose  a^*d  in  its 
"tendency.” 

And  Mr.  John  C.  Spencer,  Superin¬ 
tendent.  of  Public  Instruction  in  the 
'State  of  New  York,  about  the  begin¬ 
ning  of  the  present  school  system, 
writing  to  Governor  Seward  in  regard 
to  sectarianism  in  education,  said:  “It 
Is  an  error  to  suppose  that  the  ab¬ 
sence  of  all  religious  instruction,  if  it 
were  practicable,  is  a  mode  of  avoiding 
sectarianism.  On  the  contrary,  it 
would  be  in  itself  sectarian,  because 
it  "would  be  consonant  to  the  views  of 

particular  class,  and  opposed  to  the 
opinions  of  other  classes.  Those  who 
reject  creeds  and  resist  all  efforts  to 
Infuse  them  into  the  minds  of  the 
young  would  be  gratified  by  a  system 
which  so  fully  accomplishes  their  pur¬ 
poses.” 

According  to  Mr.  Spencer,  our  pub¬ 
lic  schools  are  “sectarian,”  though 
they  exclude  all  religious  instruction, 
because  they  are  guided  by  the  views 
-consonant  to  the  sect  of  Indifferentists 
and  opposed  to  the  views  of  many 
•other  people. 

We  are  all  taxed  for  the  education 
of  the  children  of  this  State.  More 
than  $30,000,000  are  to  be  devoted  to 
this  purpose  during  the  present  year. 
Why  should  any  of  our  citizens  who 
wish  to  have  children  educated  ac¬ 
cording"  to  their  own  particular  views 
not  have  a  right  to  their  own  share 
•of  the  money  appropriated  for  edu¬ 
cation?  They  do  not  ask  “money 
from  others,”  as  the  Times  editorial 
put  it.  The  taxes  appropriated  are 
for  the  education  of  all  the  children 
In  the  State.  If  the  Methodists’  have 
thousands  of  these  children  in  their 
missions  and  the  Episcopalians  thous¬ 
ands  more  in  their  institutions,  and 
the  Jews  an  equal  number,  and  the 
Catholics  their  thousands  in  the  par¬ 
ish  schools,  why  is  it  unjust  to  recog¬ 
nize  the  educational  work  that  is 
done  according  to  the  will  of  these 
parents?  If  the  State  is  going  to  in¬ 
terfere  in  education,  it  ought  not  to 
educate  according  to  the  views  of  the 
Indifferentists  and  tell  all  Protest- 
estant  and  Catholics  who  object  that 
they  are  asking  other  people  to  pay 
for  the  education  of  their  children. 
There  is  no  reason  why  Methodists, 
Lutherans  and  Episcopalians  may  not 
justly  claim  their  pro  rata  for  the  ed¬ 
ucation  of  their  children,  and  Catho¬ 
lics  and  Jews  do  the  same.  They  are 
not  asking  other  people’s  money.  The 
Catholics,  Protestants  and  Jews  have 
been  taxed  as  well  as  the  Indifferent- 
Usts,  and  these  last  gentlemen  have  no 


right  to  absorb  practically  the  whole 
educational  fund,  and  then  say  to 
other  people,  “You  cannot  have  any 
of  our  money.” 

By  what  right  do  the  handful  of  In¬ 
differentists  call  the  public  money 
gathered  through  general  taxation 
theirs?  It  is  set  apart  for  the  educa¬ 
tion  of  all  the  children  in  the  State, 
and  every  child  has  an  equal  right  to 
a  share  in  it. 

The  parents  have  the  final  right  to 
say  in  what  religion  the  child  is  to 
be  educated;  the  State  must  devise 
ways  and  means  to  satisfy  this  just 
demand.  This  has  been  done  in  En¬ 
gland  and  in  many  other  countries, 
and  can  easily  be  done  here.  The 
State,  having  set  apart  the  money  of 
citizens  for  education,  has  no  right  to 
insist  that  its  citizens  must  pay  again 
for  special  schools,  or  else  send  their 
children  to  public  schools  “infidel  in 
purpose  and  tendency.” 

This  whole  school  question  may  be 
settled  in  the  same  way  as  the  ques¬ 
tion  of  charitable  institutions  has  been 
settled.  In  these  institutions  the  State 
pays  by  its  general  taxation  per  capita 
for  the  work  done  for  its  wards.  So 
with  the  education  of  the  children. 
If  the  State  is  to  support  education  by 
general  taxation,  it  ought  to  consider 
the  rights  of  the  citizens  to  freedom  of 
conscience  in  the  education  of  their 
children.  The  State  cannot  in  justice 
say  to  any  of  its  citizens:  You  must 
be  taxed,  but  you  cannot  have  any 
share  of  this  taxation  for  the  educa¬ 
tion  of  your  children  unless  you  sur¬ 
render  these  children  to  a  system 
which  Daniel  Webster  insisted  is  in¬ 
fidel  in  its  purpose  and  tendency. 

AN  EDUCATOR. 

New  York,  April  25,  1901. 

Moral  Training  for  Children. 

The  following  is  taken  from  “The 
Annual  Report  of  Parish  Schools  in 
the  City  of  New  York”  for  1902: 

The  “Educational  Review”  contains 
this  remarkable  statement:  “It  is  a 
matter  of  statistics  that  one-half  oi 
all  the  children  who  go  to  school  leave 
before  the  age  of  eleven,  and  that 
three-fourths  of  them  leave  before 
they  are  twelve.”  Here  is  an  unques¬ 
tioned  fact  for  earnest  students  of  the 
science  of  education  to  consider.  Pa¬ 
triotic  citizens  must  take  cognizance 
of  the  moral  welfare  of  this  vast  body 
of  children  who  leave  school  before 
the  age  of  twelve.  Theories  will  not 
suffice.  Practical  methods  of  teach¬ 
ing  morality  are'  urgently  demanded. 

No  one  has  yet  dared  to  affirm  that 
moral  training  for  children  is  unnec¬ 
essary,  or  that  the  .State  should  as¬ 
sume  an  attitude  of  indifference  to- 


44 


IX  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


ward  virtue  and  vice.  Various  opin¬ 
ions  exist  as  to  the  ways  and  means 
best  adapted  for  the  teaching  of  mor¬ 
ality.  but  there  is  now  becoming  man¬ 
ifest  a  general  agreement  among 
Christian  denominations  that  the  most 
improved  methods  of  the  modern  edu¬ 
cator  should  be  utilized  in  favor  of 
tiie  soui’s  higher  aspirations. 

The  good  citizen,  the  reliable  mer¬ 
chant,  the  incorruptible  official,  hold¬ 
ing  a  place  which  demands  a  lofty 
standard  of  conduct,  are  personifica¬ 
tions  of  moral  convictions.  Great  is 
the  demand  for  men  of  this  type,  and 
the  supply  is  not  regulated  entirely 
by  the  demand.  The  same  rule  is 
true  in  the  domestic  circle.  Progress¬ 
ive  civilization  has  not  yet  produced 
too  many  good  husbands  and  exem¬ 
plary  wives.  The  moral  virtues — pru¬ 
dence,  justice,  fortitude  and  temper¬ 
ance — are  incorporated  as  parts  in  a 
whole,  and  take  concrete  shape  in  the 
great  characters  of  every  nation. 

Experience  shows  that  these  noble 
moral  qualities  are  not  of  spontane¬ 
ous  growth.  There  is  a  process  of  ev¬ 
olution  in  each  individual  which  is 
variable  and  dependent  on  external  as 
well  as  internal  causes.  A  large  class 
of  people  in  the  United  States  seems 
unable  to  distinguish  between  the 
Christian  and  pagan  standard  of  edu¬ 
cation.  The  charge  reasonably  made 
against  them  is.  that  they  profess  to 
be  satisfied  with  very  imperfect  re¬ 
sults  in  religious  instruction,  and  un¬ 
justly  accuse  of  a  want  of  patriotism 
those  who  try  to  point  out  their  er¬ 
ror. 

We  Catholics  have  no  desire  to  dis¬ 
turb  the  friendly  relations  existing 
among  American  citizens  when  we  as¬ 
sert  our  convictions  as  to  the  teaching 
of  Christian  morality.  It  is  a  subject 
on  which  we  are  entitled  to  form  an 
opinion  and  express  it  vigorously. 
The  good  work  (lone  In  Catholic 
schools  for  secular  education  demands 
official  recognition  and  a  fair  share  of 
the  funds  which  the  State  collects  for 
school  purposes.  It  is  false  American¬ 
ism,  and  was  condemned  by  the  foun¬ 
ders  of  the  Republic,  to  establish  by 
law  a  system  of  education  which  im¬ 
poses  taxation  without  representation. 

In  the  “Boston  Review,”  Sept.  26, 
1896,  We  Read  the  Following: 

In  an  eloquent  sermon  delivered  by 
him  recently  in  St.  John’s  church,  Syr¬ 
acuse,  N.  Y.,  of  which  he  is  the  rector. 
Rev.  John  F.  Mullaney  spoke  as  fol¬ 
lows  on  the  educational  question: 

“Even  when  it  is  conceded  that  our 
Catholic  citizens  are  conservative  and 
public-spirited,  and  that  there  is 
nothing  in  our  Catholic  teachings  and 
dogmas  incompatible  with  republican 


institutions,  we  are  still  told,  even  by 
some  Catholics,  that  in  keeping  our 
Catholic  children  aloof  and  educating 
them  upon  other  methods  than  those 
made  use  of  in  the  public  schools,  we 
are  placing  them  at  a  disadvantage; 
they  lack  the  true  American  spirit,  in¬ 
asmuch  as  they  do  not  pass  through 
the  same  mould.  Thinking  men  have 
been  recently  testing  the  value  of  that 
mould  and  have  found  in  it  some  seri¬ 
ous  flaws.  We  do  not  propose  throw¬ 
ing  stones  at  that  mould;  we  would 
not  see  it  destroyed;  we  consider  it  in 
many  respects  an  admirable  institu¬ 
tion.  We  would  see  it  strengthened 
and  perfected  and  made  truly  Ameri¬ 
can,  for  we  hold  that  the  public  school* 
as  it  now  exists  is  not  an  American- 
institution.  One-fourth  of  the  taxa¬ 
tion  that  goes  to  the  erection  and  sup¬ 
port  of  that  institution  is  taxation 
without  representation,  inasmuch  as 
those  paying  the  taxes  can  not  in  con¬ 
science  avail  themselves  of  its  ad¬ 
vantages.  Again,  the  public  schools  * 
in  their  present  secularized  form  are 
opposed  to  the  intentions  which  the 
fathers  of  this  republic  had  in  estab¬ 
lishing  them.  All  the  early  schools 
had  a  decidedly  religious  cast.  Strong., 
religious  sentiments  permeated  their 
reading-books;  religious  practices  ac¬ 
companied  their  class  exercises;  relig¬ 
ion  was  in  the  home,  in  the  school,  in  * 
the  town  hall,  in  the  very  atmosphere. 
The  Puritans  were  an  intensely  relig¬ 
ious  people;  it  was  tiieir  strong  Chris¬ 
tian  faith,  though  somewhat  marred 
by  their  puritanical  prejudices,  that 
built  up  the  staunch  citizens  which 
have  made  this  country.  Except  where 
a  school  board  can  here  and  there 
manage  to  retain  a  text-book  that  i 
gives  a  good  old-fashioned  fling  at 
Papists  and  the  Church  of  Rome, 
would  these  venerable  fathers  recog¬ 
nize  in  our  secularized  public  schools 
the  legitimate  descendants  of  their 
village,  town  and  district  schools? 
The  truly  American  school  would  be 
the  school  broad  as  .the  American  con¬ 
stitution,  the  school  in  which  every 
religious  denomination  would  have  its 
own  teachers  paid  out  of  the  tax  that 
its  members  contribute.  Then  might 
every  Christian  boy  and  girl  attend 
them  and  find  in  them  the  spiritual 
nourishment  that  would  make  of  each 
and  all  robust  Christian  men  and 
women.  Then  would  the  Christian 
spirit  that  has  given  solidity  and  fore# 
and  energy  to  our  republic  continue  to 
make  us  a  Christian  people. 

“The  tendency  the  world  over  is  t® 
secularize  education.  But  would  it 
not  be  worth  the  while  of  responsible 
persons  to  pause  before  running  head¬ 
long  in  that  direction  and  question  . 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


41 


the  wisdom  of  such  proceeding's?  Is 
ft  a  safe  course  to  leave  God  and  His 
Christian  revelation  outside  the  school 
room?  The  child  is  frequently  more 
logical  than  the  man.  If  the  dis¬ 
tinctive  religious  formulas  that  em¬ 
body  for  him  the  truths  of  Christian 
revelation,  as  he  and  his  parents  ap¬ 
prehend  them,  be  eliminated  from  his 
books;  if  all  pious  practices  are  abol¬ 
ished  during  school  hours,  why  may 
they  not  be  abolished  all  day  long? 
Why  may  they  not  be  eliminated  alto¬ 
gether?  So  may  the  child  reason;  so 
has  he  reasoned,  and  as  the  cares  and 
struggles  of  life  absorb  his  energies 
he  forgot  the  prayers  he  had  learned 
at  his  mother’s  knee,  and  every  shred 
of  Christian  truth  dropped  from  his 
soul.  Who  are  they  who  would  see 
our  children  come  to  this  pass?  They 
are  atheists,  infidels,  agnostics,  men 
without  religion  themselves.  Do  they 
represent  the  best  traditions  of  our 
republic?  These  traditions  should 
be  held  sacred.  Our  very  existence 
as  a  nation  is  rooted  in  them.  There 
is  no  such  thing  as  a  beginning  in  his¬ 
tory.  Every  event  is  the  outcome  of 
all  previous  events.  Our  present  state 
of  existence  is  rooted  in  the  pest  activ¬ 
ities  of  our  ancestors.  Although  our 
republic  ostensibly  stands  upon  the 
basis  of  natural  rights,  still,  in  the  en¬ 
forcement  of  these  rights,  in  the  rul¬ 
ings  of  our  courts  of  justice,  in  the 
fundamental  principles  of  law  and  or¬ 
der,  in  the  great  public  opinion  that 
guides  external  .behavior,  it  is  Chris¬ 
tianity  that  speaks  and  acts  and  is 
the  moving  power.  The  fathers  of  our 
Constitution,  who  builded  so  well  and 
so  nobly,  intended  to  build  in  a  Chris¬ 
tian  sense.  They  could  scarcely  do 
otherwise.  The  common  law  of  En¬ 
gland,  which  was  the  very  atmosphere 
in  which  they  breathed,  was  Christian 
in  its  growth  and_  development  for  a 
thousand  years.  And  for  this  reason 
no  institution  that  is  not  planted  in 
Christian  principles  can  thrive  or 
flourish  among  us,  or  be  a  boon  to  our 
people.  By  all  means  let  us  have  our 
public  schools,  but  let  us  broaden 
them  and  lay  their  foundations  deep¬ 
er.  Let  us  make  them  intensely  relig¬ 
ious  and  universally  denominational. 
Our  Constitution  is  pledged  to  pro¬ 
tect  in  the  exercise  of  their  functions 
all  religions  not  subversive  of  govern¬ 
ment;  but  secularism,  irreligion,  athe¬ 
ism  and  agnosticism  have  no  rights  as 
such  to  enforce  which  our  State  or 
federal  laws  are  bound  to  respect. 

“The  methods  of  our  Catholic 
schools  are  not  the  methods  of  our 
public  schools.  The  Jesuits  have  their 
methods  bequeathed  to  them  from  the 
sixteenth  century,  when  they  cap¬ 


tured  the  whole  civilized  world  by  the 
brilliancy  of  their  teaching.  The  sis¬ 
terhoods  have  their  methods  modeled 
after  the  constitutions  that  Peter 
Fourier  drafted  for  them  in  the  last 
years  of  the  same  century.  The  Chris¬ 
tian  brotherhoods  have  their  methods 
as  laid  down  by  one  of  the  most  emi¬ 
nent  educational  geniuses  of  the  sev¬ 
enteenth  century,  blessed  John  Bap¬ 
tist  de  la  Salle.  Now  we  want  the 
light  of  day  let  in  upon  these  methods. 
We  -would  have  them  perfectly  under¬ 
stood.  We  would  have  them  examined 
in  their  application  and  their  results. 
We  do  not  fear  contact  with  the  State. 
We  would  have  all  our  teachers  hold 
certificates  and  diplomas  from  the 
State.  We  would  rejoice  to  see  the 
State  superintendents  of  education  vis¬ 
it  our  classes,  examine  our  work,  read 
our  text-books,  study  our  methods, 
look  carefully  into  the  results  we 
achieve;  in  a  word,  become  familiar 
with  our  work.  We  are  not  ashamed 
of  results  or  methods.  We  do  not 
shirk  competition.  What  we  do  em¬ 
phatically  object  to  is  that  intelligent 
men  should  congregate  in  nooks  and 
corners  and  cry  down  our  methods 
and  sneer  at  our  results  without  hav¬ 
ing  even  given  a  fair  examination  to 
the  one  or  the  other. 

“However,  our  Catholic  schools  are 
becoming  better  known  than  formerly, 
and  their  work  is  appreciated.  Sev¬ 
eral  of  them  in  the  State  of  New  York 
are  under  the  school  boards  and  are 
subject  to  inspection  and  examination 
from  the  State  officers.  Their  record 
is  to  be  found  in  the  published  re¬ 
ports.  Several  are  under  the  regents, 
and  the  very  rigid  examinations  of 
this  body  give  evidence  of  the  effi¬ 
ciency  and  standing  of  the  schools  so 
placed.  The  boys  of  our  Catholic 
schools  in  New  York  State  enter  the 
race  for  scholarships  in  the  secular 
universities,  and  for  cadetships  at 
West  Point  and  Annapolis,  and  they 
generally  carry  off  the  honors.  In  the 
face  of  these  facts  who  will  undertake 
to  accuse  our  schools  of  inefficiency? 

“Wherein,  then.'!  is  this  system  in¬ 
compatible  with  our  American  spirit? 
Is  it  that  we  do  not  teach  patriotism? 
Patriotism  is  not  a  commodity  to  be 
confined  within  the  covers  of  a  book. 
It  is  not  a  lesson  to  be  conned  by  rote. 
It  is  in  the  very  air.  It  permeates 
public  opinion;  it  underlies  our  pub¬ 
lic  and  private  actions;  it  dictates  our 
public  ^neasures..  It  can  no  more  be 
kept  out  of  a  school  when  it  is  the 
inspiration  of  a  whole  people  than 
can  the  atmosphere  one  breathes.  It 
may  be  fanned  in  the  child’s  breast  to 
a  brighter  glow  by  the  rehearsal  ol 
the  story  of  independence,  of  th* 


46 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


lives  of  America’s  great  men,  of  the 
deeds  of  valor  and  oaring  achieved 
upon  the  battlefield;  by  the  recital  of 
extracts  from  our  great  orators  and 
poets;  by  the  celebration  of  anniver¬ 
saries  and  the  raising  of  flags;  but 
those  things  would  avail  little  in  a 
breast  in  which  the  spirit  of  patriot¬ 
ism  is  extinct.  Now,  the  healthy,  patri¬ 
otic  sentiment  that  fills  the  land  has 
not  been  shut  out  from  our  Catholic 
schools.  We  do  not  neglect  the  his¬ 
tory  of  our  independence,  though  we 
may  call  the  attention  of  our  Catholic 
youths  to  the  share  such  men  as 
Charles  Carroll,  of  Carrollton,  and 
his  cousin,  Archbishop  Carroll,  and 
Barry,  the  father  of  me  American 
Navy,  and  other  Catholics  took  in  the 
struggle.  While  we  trace  the  wonder¬ 
ful  growth  of  our  country  in  wealth 
and  prosperity  we  do  not  fail  to  make 
our  children  familiar  with  the  no  less 
wonderful  progress  of  Catholicity  in 
this  land  of  liberty.  While  we  omit  no 
name  that  has  honored  America  in  the 
world  of  letters,  we  do  not  forget  to 
mention  those  who,  being  Catholics, 
are  ignored  or  inadequately  treated 
in  text-books  coming  from  non-Catli- 
olic  pens.  AVe  have  actually  been  cen¬ 
sured  for  this,  and  our  school  books 
have  been  called  un-American.  Is  the 
accusation  in  any  sense  a  fair  one? 
Surely  the  censure  is  far  more  un- 
American  than  the  act  censured,  for 
the  essence  of  our  American  spirit  is 
h  sense  of  honor  and  fair  play. 

“And  for  this  reason  it  will  not  be 
regarded  as  a  fault  of  our  system  if 
we  teach  history  from  our  own  point 
of  view.  Once  we  were  accused  of 
falsifying  history  when  treating  of  the 
great  religious  upheavals  of  the  past; 
but  there  is  not  a  statement  in  our 
Catholic  books  that  can  not  now  be 
confirmed  by  a  non-Catholic  authority 
of  weight  as  a  scholar.  We  hold  with 
Carlisle  that  ‘the  first  of  all  gospels  is 
that  no  lie  shall  live;*  and  so  we  can 
not  accept  either  the  statement  of 
facts  or  the  conclusions  of  our  non- 
Catholic  histories  even  when  they  are 
fairest.  We  hold  that  our  Catholic 
historians  ought  to  be  the  best  judges 


of  all  matters  pertaining  to  the  Cath¬ 
olic  Church,  just  as  the  members  of’ 
a  family  should  be  best  acquainted 
with  the  inner  workings  and  purposes 
of  the  family  in  all  its  actions.  No, 
we  positively  decline  to  accept  the  ver¬ 
sions  of  history  that  are  prepared  by 
narrow  and  prejudiced  historians. 

“Finally,  it  is  objected  that  the  ex¬ 
clusiveness  of  our  Catholic  schools-; 
prevents  our  Catholic  children  from, 
being  moulded  after  the  typical  pat¬ 
tern  of  the  American  boy  or  girl. 
Then  it  is  equally  true  of  every  private 
school  in  the  land  containing  the 
children  of  the  elite.  Every  objection 
applying  to  us  would  with  equal  force* 
apply  to  them.  There  is  a  difference 
in  the  type  of  a  boy  or  girl  turned  out 
by  a  Catholic  school  and  a  public 
school. 

“The  public  school  child  is  more- 
self-reliant;  he  has  more  assurance; 
he  never  doubts  about  his  ability  to  do- 
anything  he  undertakes;  the  Catholic 
school  child  is  diffident  of  his  powers, 
under-estimates  himself  and  requires 
encouragement  to  put  forth  his  whole 
strength.  This  is  especially  true  of“ 
the  child  of  Irish  descent.  Is  this 
modesty  and  difference  a  great  defect?- 
It  may  handicap  one  at  the  start,  but 
with  practice  in  any  trade  or  profes¬ 
sion,  with  constant  incumbency  of 
putting  forth  all  one's  energy  to  hold 
one’s  own  in  the  struggle  for  place 
and  wealth,  the  modesty  and  diffidence 
soon  cease  to  be  a  source  or  weakness. 
In  all  other  respects  an  analysis  of 
the  objection  vanishes  into  thin  air* 
It  is  mere  cant  phrase. 

“There  is  no  moulding;  there  is  no¬ 
fusion.  Children  that  sit  on  the  same- 
bench  in  school  in  after  life  may 
never  meet.  Each  may  belong  to  a 
different  circle.  But  the  child  who- 
has  had  a  religious  education  and 
who  lives  up  to  the  precepts  of  his* 
training  need  not  regret  it.  He  is  no 
stranger;  he  is  at  home  in  a  Chris¬ 
tian  republic,  safely  guarded  by 
Christian  laws,  animated  by  Christian 
sentiments  and  holding  by  a  Christian; 
standard  of  truth  and  morality.” 


7 — Professor  Ditchburn's  Article 

iv  rom  the  Pottsville,  Pa.,  Evening  Chronicle,  January  11,  1904.] 


At  the  meeting  of  the  Educational 
Association  of  Schuylkill  County  held 
at  this  place  on  Saturday,  Jan.  9,  Rob¬ 
ert  F.  Ditchburn,  president  of  the  or¬ 
ganization  and  superintendent  of  the 
public  schools  of  Tarriaqua,  read  the 
following  paper  on  “Morality  in  the 


Public  Schools,”  it  being  unanimously^ 
decided  that  it  should  be  given  to  th« 
local  press  for  publication: 

Fellow  Teachers:  Our  public  school 
system,  like  other  things  in  thi© 
world,  has  its  enemies.  If  we  ex- 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OP  LABOR 


amine  the  cause  of  this  enmity  we 
will  And  that  it  comes  from  an  oppo¬ 
sition  or  interference  with  what  cer¬ 
tain  people  think  to  be  their  interest 
or  welfare.  They  never  think  that 
the  thing-  they  oppose  may  have  just 
as  much  right  to  be  as  anything  they 
practice  and  believe  in.  It  is  charged 
by  half  of  the  Christian  church  and 
those  directly  under  the  influence  of 
such,  that  our  schools  do  not  teach 
morality,  that  they  are  vicious  and 
Godless,  wholly  given  up  to  material 
success,  wholly  of  this  world;  for,  if 
we  do  not  teach  religious  doctrine,  w'e 
cannot  teach  morality.  Such  people 
do  not  know  that  morality  existed  be¬ 
fore  Christianity.  They  do  not  know 
that  morality  has  been  in  the  world 
as  long  as  humanity.  When  people 
say  our  schools  are  Godless  they  want 
to  say  they  are  anti-religious. 

What  is  morality?  Morality  com¬ 
prises  the  whole  of  human  actions, 
public  and  private,  and  is  a  general 
name  we  give  to  all  such  actions. 
Those  actions  that  promote  human 
welfare,  present  and  future,  we  call 
moral  or  right. 

But  if  morality  consists  of  the  sum 
of  human  actions,  and  these  actions 
are  the  effect  of  environment,  and  as 
no  one  has  or  can  have  the  same  en¬ 
vironment  as  another,  then  does  it 
not  follow  that  each  must  have  a  sys¬ 
tem  of  morality  peculiar  to  himself? 

To  this  question  the  answer  must 
be  yes.  And  is  it  not  so?  Does  not 
the  morality  of  youth  differ  from  that 
of  age?  That  of  man  from  that  of 
woman?  Intelligence  from  ignorance? 
Master  from  slave?  Employer  from 
employe?  But  why  go  on  collecting 
differences?  Can  we  not  find  a  com¬ 
mon  basis,  a  point  of  agreement  by 
means  of  which  we  may  be  able  to  de¬ 
termine  the  rightness  or  wrongness, 
the  morality  or  immorality,  of  an  ac¬ 
tion?  That  common  basis  is  Life  and 
all  that  belongs  to  life.  “Thou  shalt 
not  kill,”  neither  shalt  thou  diminish 
the  pleasure  of  living.  Life  and  love 
of  life  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness 
are  the  common  heritage  of  all. 
Here  is  the  foundation  of  the  Deca¬ 
logue  and  of  every  true  system  of 
morals. 

Now  if  it  be,  as  the  defamers  of  the 
public  school  system  say,  that  it  is 
one-sided  and  only  reaches  the  intel¬ 
lect,  and  leads  people  to  care  only  for 
material  success,  ease  and  comfort. 
To  this  I  reply,  if  our  school  system 
has  done  this,  then  I  think  it  has  been 
a  great  success  and  ought  to  be  en¬ 
dorsed  by  every  one.  If  it  has  given 
us  better  food  and  more  of  it,  better 
clothing,  better  houses  to  live  in,  bet¬ 
ter  means  of  traveling  and  scores  of 


4  t: 


other  convenient  things,  which  the 
purest  and  highest  never  makes  any 
objection  to  using,  it  has  helped  us 
wonderfully,  and  I  hope  it  will  help 
us  still  more  in  the  same  direction. 
And  are  we  not  commanded  to  seek 
first  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  ;jnd  are- 
these  good  material  things  not  at  the 
entrance  of  this  kingdom  and  many 
of  them  are  important  additions,  for 
let  me  say,  provert.v  is  a  standing 
menace  to  all  goodness.  Morality  is 
never  high  where  people  have  to  strug¬ 
gle  from  early  morn  till  far  into  the 
night  for  the  meanest  necessaries  of 
life.  The  morality  of  an  empty  stom¬ 
ach  is  a  weak  one,  and  the  lady  was 
right  when  she  said:  “I  always  fee! 
most  goodly  in  good  clothes.”  Moral¬ 
ity  is  always  low  in  mean,  miserable 
tenements.  We  ought  not  to  expect 
much  from  children  reared  in  a  filthy 
alley,  their  neighbors  on  one  side  liv¬ 
ing  in  a  stable,  and  on  the  other  in  a 
hog  pen.  There  is  a  deep  significance 
in  the  words  “poor  but  honest.”  The 
most  important  education  we  can  give 
to  anyone  is  how  to  provide  the  nec¬ 
essaries,  comforts  and  refinements  of 
life.  These  form  the  very  foundation 
of  morality  and  intellectual  progress, 
“All  that  a  man  hath  he  will  give  for 
his  life.” 

Again,  it  is  charged  by  the  enemies 
of  the  public  school  that  our  morality 
and  right  living  as  a  nation  is  grow¬ 
ing  worse  and  worse,  and  that  our 
one-sided,  vicious.  Godless  teaching 
is  the  cause.  To  meet  this,  let  us 
take  one  of  the  greatest  calamities 
that  can  befall  a  nation,  say  war.  How 
<«-.  *+  on  now.  and  how  two  or 

three,  nay  only  one  hundred  years: 
ago?  Now,  the  sick,  wounded  and 
prisoners  are  cared  for  with  a  tender¬ 
ness  that  must  have  its  source  deep 
in  the  human  heart,  and  the  non-com¬ 
batants  in  the  neighborhood  of  the 
struggle  are  protected  in  a  manner 
utterly  unknown  to  former  times. 
Then  countries  were  wantonly  de¬ 
vastated  and  the  inhabitants  murdered 
or  driven  off;  the  sick  in  the  army 
died  on  the  march;  and  the  wounded 
by  hundreds  and  thousands  on  the 
battlefield;  prisoners  were  often 
butchered  in  cold  blood.  Take  the 
close  of  the  War  of  the  Rebellion, 
when  almost  every  household  in  the 
North  mourned  for  a  father  or  a  son 
who  would  never  return,  and  when  the 
whole  people  were  exasperated  by  suf¬ 
ferings  and  losses  caused  by  the  war. 
Yet,  when  the  rebellion  crouched  in 
the  last  ditch  and  resistance  had  end¬ 
ed,  the  victorious  North  won  the 
greatest  victory  ever  won  by  any  na¬ 
tion.  Instead  of  dragging  the  van¬ 
quished  after  her  car  of  triumph  and 


48 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


'butchering1  them  for  a.  Northern  holi¬ 
day,  she  raised  up  the  fallen  and  re¬ 
membered  our  common  brotherhood. 
Now,  I  do  not  claim  that  our  public 
schools  won  this  great  victory,  but  I 
do  claim  that  the  only  people  who 
have  won  such  a  victory  as  this  was 
a  people  who  believed  in  and  have 
been  educated  in  the  public  schools. 

Again,  see  how  differences  between 
nations  are  amicably  settled  by  arbi¬ 
tration  that  but  recently  wou  d  have 
been  settled  by  the  sword.  What  a 
great  change  has  been  effected  here 
and  is  growing  more  and  more  pro¬ 
nounced,  and,  in  spite  of  croak  of 
birds  of  ill  omen,  the  day  is  coming 
on  apace  when  war  shall  be  no  more, 
and  I  believe  our  public  schools  are 
helping  on  this  glorious  change. 

Again,  let  some  other  misfortune, 
as  fire  and  flood,  befall  us,  and  you 
will  see  how  wealth  pours  itself  out 
like  water  to  repair  the  damage,  and 
It  is  accompanied  by  real  sympathy,  by 
a  yearning  desire  to  comfort  those  in 
affliction.  See  how  the  widow  and  or¬ 
phan  are  cared  for;  see  how  the  noble 
hospitals  and  other  institutions  for  les¬ 
sening  human  misery  spring  up 
around  us;  nay,  dumb  brutes  are  in 
many  instances  cared  for  better  now 
than  was  poor  and  helpless  humanity 
of  not  so  many  years  ago  To  this  it 
may  be  replied,  that  alongside  of  such 
institutions,  look  at  the  many  large 
prisons.  True,  very  true,  and  if  every 
one  was  in  prison  who  ought  to  be 
there  we  should  very  likely  have  to 
increase  our  prison  accommodations. 
But  make  an  examination  of  those 
who  have  sunk  and  are  sinking  into 
prison  cells,  and  you  will  find  that 
ninety-nine  per  cent,  of  them  were 
never,  or  but  little,  under  such  influ¬ 
ence  as  that  of  the  public  schools. 

Again  there  is  another  little  matter 
that  was  lost  sight  of  when  it  was  con¬ 
cluded  that  the  morality  of  today  is 
not  as  high  as  it  has  been.  We  now 
have  the  telephone,  telegraph,  the 
well  organized  postoffice,  the  daily 
•press,  and  many  other  means  of  quick 
•communication.  It  is  not  so  long  ago 
that  the  telegraph  was  not,  and  the 
-daily  papers  so  few  that  the  masses 
-seldom  saw  them.  Before  the  inven¬ 
tion  of  one  and  the  great  activity  of 
the  other,  a  wrong  done  in  one  part 
■of  the  country  was  only  talked  about 
by  those  in  the  immediate  vicinity, 
and  rarely  reached  beyond.  Today, 
a  wrong  done  ir  any  part  of  the  world 
is  tomorrow  read  and  discussed  at 
♦every  fireside  of  civilized  society;  and, 
further,  the  wrongs  of  today  were  in 
numberless  instances  the  rights  of 
mast  generations. 


Again,  is  the  influence  of  the  church 
and  the  Sunday  School  no  help  against 
this  moral  degradation?  Tell  it  not 
in  Gath.  Why,  once  upon  a  time  the 
chinch  was  the  only  bulwark  against 
universal  brutish  ignorance,  when  she 
had  to  teach  not  only  sacred  but  also 
profane  things,  and  yet  the  world  did- 
not  go  backwards.  True,  this  period 
is  known  as  the  “dark  ages.” 

Now.  since  we  have  taken  the  pro¬ 
fane  things  off  her  hands,  something 
she  does  not  appear  to  relish,  then  do 
you  not  think  that  the  great  work  of 
enlightenment  will  be  double  if  both 
parties  work  as  I  am  sure  we  teachers 
work?  Yes,  and  it  has,  if  not  dou¬ 
bled,  wonderfully  increased  the  re¬ 
sults  since  this  division  of  labor  took 
place. 

Not  to  continue  this  part  of  the  sub¬ 
ject  further,  I  will  only  add,  if  the  def¬ 
inition  of  morality  is  correct,  our 
school  system  must  be  worthy  of  all 
praise  if  it  teaches  people  how  to  pro¬ 
vide  the  necessaries.  conveniences 
and  refinements  of  life;  if  wre  can 
start  our  pupils  here  we  have  laid  a 
sure  foundation  for  the  future. 
Whether  our  schools  may  please  or 
displease,  further  or  hinder  the  designs 
of  others,  we  need  not  care:  for  this 
we  know,  they  are  the  outcome  of  all 
the  past,  and  they  will  continue  as 
long  as  they  promote  life.  love  of  life 
and  tiie  pursuit  of  happiness.  Being 
on  this  planet  is  one  continuous 
growth;  the  past  made  the  present; 
the  present  will  make  the  future,  and 
since  the  division  of  labor  referred  to 
was  made,  it  has  been  discovered  that 
God  reigns,  and  not  the  devil  by  any 
means.  Not  a  sparrow  falls  without 
the  knowledge  of  that  being  who  is  in 
all  and  over  all.  The  same  power 
that  caused  the  nebulous  atoms  to 
embrace  each  other  and  thus  form  the 
world  is  still  at  work,  and  continues 
the  same  orderly  development.  The 
same  power  that  brought  forth  the  so¬ 
lar  system  and  every  other  system 
throughout  infinite  space,  brought 
forth  at  the  proper  time  our  school 
system.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that 
just  as  soon  as  a  people,  be  they  many 
or  few.  advance  to  true  manhood,  to 
the  point  where  each  can  look  his  fel¬ 
low  in  the  face  and  say,  “I,  too,  am 
a  man.”  then  just  as  surely  do  free 
schools  commence  to  have  free  course 
and  be  glorified.  This  system,  like 
every  other  that  has  gone  before,  is 
not  final,  but  only  the  beginning  of 
something  better,  to  which  it  will  give 
place  when  the  fullness  of  time  shall 
come,  and  not  till  then;  and,  believe 
me,  it  will  not  be  replaced  by  that 
which  has  been,  so  there  is  no  hope^ 
for  the  good  old  times.  If,  for  the  be-' 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


41 


ginning,  growth  and  present  condition 
•of  societies  and  governments  we 
question  history,  it  answers  that  the 
isolation  of  the  savage  gave  place  to 
the  family,  the  weakness  of  the  fam¬ 
ily  to  the  strength  of  t*e  tribe,  the 
tribes  grew  into  kingdoms,  into  em¬ 
pires,  and  these  have  passed  and  are 
passing  into  republics — the  latest  and 
highest  form  of  government.  The 
Power  that  makes  these  changes  has¬ 
tens  not,  pauses  not.  The  work  done 
in  the  present  may  seem  impercept¬ 
ible,  but  time  will  show  it.  Once  we 
thought  the  hills  were  eternal,  but 
now  we  know  they  crumble  away  and 
form  the  mold  of  the  plain.  Yes.  and 
past  institutions  and  past  forms  of  so¬ 
ciety  give  but  the  soul  in  which  our 
life  tree  grows.  Out  of  the  low  the 
higher  comes.  All  who  are  acquaint¬ 
ed  with  the  history  of  education  can 
easily  trace  the  same  advancement 
there  that  is  found  in  the  history  of 
societies  and  governments.  When¬ 
ever  we  use  our  power  and  influence 
for  the  purpose  of  turning  back  the 
tide  of  human  advancement,  be  it  in 
education  or  what  you  will,  we  place 
ourselves  in  opposition  to  a  power 
against  which  every  backward  move¬ 
ment  insets  with  certain  destruction. 
The  shores  of  this  irresistible  flood 
are  strewn  with  the  wrecks  of  human 
pride,  lust  of  power  and  ignorant  hu¬ 
man  selfishness. 

The  institution  that  teaches  people 
how  to  win  the  good  things  of  this 
life  is  neither  vicious  nor  Godless, 
and  if  wre  look  around  we  will  see 
that  the  people  who  vilify  our  public 
school  system  seem  to  get  their  full 
share  of  such  things,  for,  generally, 
they  are  well  housed,  well  clothed  and 
their  eyes  stick  out  with  fatness. 

I  will  now  as  briefly  as  possible 
speak  of  the  work  done  in  our 
schools.  Of  course  we  are  called 
upon  to  teach  the  common  school 
branches  and  ft  may  be  a  few'  others 
added.  Now,  if  this  was  all.  wre  teach¬ 
ers  w-ould  have,  what  many  people 
think,  a  good  time;  but  along  with 
this  work  must  go  on  another  kind  of 
work;  the  pupil  must  learn  obedience, 
self-control,  respect  for  the  rights  of 
others,  forethought,  consequences  of 
actions,  truthfulness  and  honesty, 
gentleness  and  kindness.  Our*  suc¬ 
cess  with  this  latter  kind  of  work 
will  generally  be  the  measure  of  suc¬ 
cess  with  the  former.  It  is  with  the 
latter  "where  the  hard  and  difficult 
■work  of  the  school  comes  in.  It  is 
here  where  the  opposing  forces  of 
school  work  are  met.  Among  these 
forces  we  have  in  the  pupils  opposi¬ 
tion  to  the  restraints  of  the  school; 
tire  attractions  of  the  street;  the 


home;  the  very  limited  time  in  which 
the  teacher  has  to  do  his  work,  the 
average  time  of  the  pupiis  is  only 
about  two  and  a  half  hours  a  day, 
and  during  the  remaining  time  he  is 
under  some  other  teacher.  In  this 
limited  time  teachers  have  to  do  their 
work,  more  than  half  of  wrhich  is  to 
neutralize  the  many  evil  influences 
that  have  been  and  are  operating  on 
their  pupils. 


the 

forces,  which  are  the 
in  forming  the  character 
We  must  answer  home, 
then  people  met  on  the 
elsewhere.  Education 


If  it  should  be  asked  among  all 
educational 
most  potent 
of  children? 
undou  btedly 
street  and 

does  not  commence  according  to  the 
laws  of  Pennsylvania  at  the  age  of 
six  years,  but  according  to  the  laws 
of  the  Great  Jehovah,  with  the  first 
breath  the  child  drawrs.  It  begins 
with  the  mother’s  look,  with  the 
father’s  nod  of  approbation  or  sign  of 
reproof,  with  a  sister’s  gentle  pres¬ 
sure  of  the  hand,  or  a  brother’s  nobl- 
act  of  forbearance.  Time,  place  and 
opportunity  are  all  in  favor  of  home. 

It  is  said  the  best  part  of  anyone’s 
education  is  acquired  during  the  firsts 
seven  years.  True  or  not,  wre  all 
know  how  important  these  years  are, 
and  during  these  years  xhe  child  is  or 
ought  to  be  wholly  under  the  control 
of  the  parent.  How  like  its  parents 
the  child  becomes,  born  it  may  be, 
with  a  similar  nature  and  then  acted 
on  by  parental  example.  How  power¬ 
ful  the  last  is  in  moulding  the  char¬ 
acter  of  the  child  and  consequently 
the  man.  Hear  what  Smiles  says  of 
example,  especially  the  examples  set 
by  parents;  “Example  is  one  of  the 
most  potent  instructors  though  it 
teaches  without  a  tongue.  It  is  the 
practical  school  of  mankind  working 
by  action,  which  is  always  more  forci¬ 
ble  than  wrords.  We  live  in  deeds. 
Precept  ma}r  point  the  wray,  but  it  is 
silent,  continuous  example  conveyed 
to  us  by  habits  and  living  with  us,  in 
fact,  that  carries  us  along.  We  are 
much  more  apt  to  learn  through  the 
eye  rather  than  the  ear.” 


Whatever  children  see  they  uncon¬ 
sciously  imitate  and  they  insensibly 
become  like  those  who  are  about 
them.  Hence  the  vast  importance  of 
domestic  training.  For  no  matter 
how  good  our  schools  are.  the  example 
set  in  our  homes  must  always  be  of 
vastly  more  influence  in  forming  the 
character  of  our  future  men  and 
women.  Home  is  the  nucleus  of  na¬ 
tional  life,  and  from  this  source,  be  it 
pure  or  tainted,  issue  the  habits, 
principles  and  maxims  that  govern 
public  as  well  as  private  life.  Our 
example  in  conduct  is  constantly  be- 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 


f.fi 


-coming-  inwoven  with  the  lives  of 
■Others  and  contributing-  to  their  char¬ 
acter  for  better  or  for  worse.  How 
sterrible  is  action.  The  thought  may 
die  with  the  thinker,  but  let  it  pass 
into  action  and  it  becomes  immortal 
and  every  one  of  us  by  our  several 
acts  either  increases  or  diminishes 
the  sum  of  human  happiness. 

■“Our  actions  travel,  and  are  veiled; 
and  yet 

We  sometime  catch  a  fearful  glimpse 
of  one; 

When  out  of  sight  its  march  hath 
well  nigh  gone, 

.An  unveiled  thing  which  we  can  ne'er 
forget. 

All  since  it  gathers  up  into  its  course 
And  they  do  grow  with  it  nnd  are  its 
force, 

-One  day  with  dizzy  speed  that  thing 
shall  come, 

Recoiling  on  the  heart  that  was  its 
'  home.” 

v  What  we  are  now — physically,  men- 
:  tally  and  morally — is  the  result  of 
what  we  ourselves  have  done,  and 
what  has  been  done  to  us  by  every 
person,  place  and  thing  with  which 
owe  have  come  in  contact.  Nay,  it 
.  goes  farther  back  still.  From  the 
dim  distant  shores  of  the  past,  our 
ancestors,  sons  of  the  mountain  and 
the  flood,  holding  up  savage  hands, 
•call  to  us  of  the  now  “Wo  made  you.” 
From  these  on  to  sages  of  Egypt  and 
Greece,  to  the  empire  and  civilization 
of  Rome,  come  the  voices,  “We  made 
you.”  From  Mount  Calvary  for  near¬ 
ly  two  thousand  years  have  been 
(echoing  the  words,  “We  made  you.” 
On,  on  through  the  “dark  ages”  up  to 
^the  dawn,  still  the  voices  call  to  us. 
From  the  darkest  and  brightest  of  all 
jrthe  past  still  heard  are  the  voices. 
!And  it  is  a  solemn  thing  to  every  one 
of  us,  that  the  only  answer  we  get  to 
allow  our  questioning  of  the  unknown 
future  is  “You  make  me.” 

To  meet  the  inexorable  demands  of 
the  future  let  us  ever  continue  to 
strive,  through  good  report  and 
through  evil  report,  to  raise  up  noble 
men  and  women,  who.  having  been  so 
trained  in  their  youth  that  their 
bodies  are  the  ready  servants  of  the 
will,  and  do  with  equal  pleasure  all 
the  work  they  are  capable  of;  and 
whose  minds  are  stored  with  a  kb  owl" 
edge  of  the  fundamental  truths  of  na¬ 
ture  and  of  the  laws  of  her  opera - 
btions;  who  are  full  of  life  and  fire,  but 
whose  passions  are  controlled  by  a 
vigorous  will,  the  servant  of  a  tender 
•^conscience;  who  have  learned  to  love 
yall  beauty,  whether  of  nature  or  of 
-ail;  and  to  hate  all  vileness  and  to 
•I respect  >  thers  as  themselves. 


Itev.  Francis  P.  Donnelly,  S.  J.,  at 
Wyoming,  I*a.,  on  “Religion  and  Mor¬ 
ality,”  says: 

For  what,  my  dear  friends,  is  re¬ 
ligion  and  what  is  morality?  Re¬ 
ligion  is  the  summing  up  of  our  re¬ 
lations  with  God.  Religion  is  a  com¬ 
plete  statement  of  how  we  stand  to¬ 
wards  God.  That  statement  has  two 
chapters,  the  chapter  of  truths  about 
God  and  man,  the  chapter  about  du¬ 
ties  between  man  and  God  and  man 
and  man;  the  first  chapter  contains 
what  we  must  believe;  the  second 
chapter  Avhat  we  must  do;  the  first 
chapter  is  the  chapter  of  dogma;  the 
second  the  chapter  of  virtue.  Re¬ 
ligion,  then,  in  its  widest  sense  com¬ 
prehends  morality  or  good  living. 
Morality  is  practical  religion  *  * 

Religion  gives  the  foundation  to 
morality;  it  gives  an  adequate  sanc¬ 
tion  to  morality;  it  gives  the  motive 
power  to  morality.  Morality  without 
religion  is  an  engine  without  steam; 
it  is  flesh  and  blood  without  the  flush 
and  force  of  life.  It  is  a  pulseless, 
nerveless,  sinewless,  muscleless,  back¬ 
boneless  sort  of  a  creature.  Religion 
is  the  throbbing  heart,  the  life-blood, 
the  vivifying  soul,  the  stirring  energy 
of  the  moral  life.  Take  away  religion 
and  you  take  away  the  example  of 
Christ,  and  the  good  example  of 
Christ  has  been  the  .  dynamic  force 
that  has  electrified  the  saints  and 
Christian  heroes  and  noblest  men  and 
women  the  world  has  ever  known. 
The  short  martyrdom,  of  the  fire,  the 
sword  or  the  wild  animal,  the  long 
martyrdom  of  a  life  of  purity,  justice 
and  charity  have  been  made  possible 
because  Christ  has  lived  and  the  mar¬ 
tyrs  have  learned  to  love  Him.  Take 
away  Christ’s  missionary  spirit  and 
Mother  Katherine  Drexel  would  be 
spending  her  millions  in  fashion  and 
folly  at  Newport  rather  than  in  the 
educating  and  uplifting  of  the  In¬ 
dians  and  Negroes.  Take  away 
Christ’s  pity  for  the  suffering  and 
Nathaniel  Hawthorne’s  daughter, 
delicately  reared  in  refinement  and 
culture,  would  not  today  in  New  York 
city  be  giving  for  life  t lie  work  of  her 
hands  and  the  devotion  of  her  heart 
to  those  who  are  afflicted  with  iueur- 
abel  cancers.  Take  away  Christ’s  love 
of  souls,  erase  Calvary  from  the  his¬ 
tory  of  the  world,  and  Father  Damien 
would  never  have  borne  to  his  agony 
and  crucifixion  among  the  lepers  of 
Molokai,  but  would  have  lived  and 
died  contendedly  as  a  small  farmer 
on  the  fields  of  Belgium.  What 
would  the  f>oor  and  suffering  do  with¬ 
out  hope  and  patience?  What  would 
the  rich  do  without  gratitude  to  God 
and  the  realization  of  the  obligation 
of  wealth  ?  *  *  * 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


8— Something  Better 


53 


If  the  reader  has  had  the  patience 
to  wade  through  the  incoherent 
thoughts,  the  undignified  expressions 
and  illogical  conclusions  of  one  who 
is  a  superintendent  of  public  schools 
at  Tamaqua  and  is  honored  by  his 
fellow  superintendents  of  Schuylkill 
county  with  tire  position  of  President 
of  their  Educational  Association,  we 
now  ask  him,  by  way  of  contrast,  to 
partake  of  the  following  feast  pre¬ 
pared  for  him  by  no  less  personages 
than  the  philosophers,  statesmen  and 
historians,  William  E.  Gladstone  and 
Lord  Macauley: 

Gladstone  on  Catholicity. 

Mr.  Gladstone  paid  the  following 
high  tribute  to  the  Catholic  Church: 
“She  has  marched  for  1,500  years  at 
the  head  of  civilization  and  has  har¬ 
nessed  to  her  chariot,  as  the  horses  of 
a  triumphal  car,  the  chief  intellectual 
and  material  forces  of  the  world.  Her 
art  is  the  art  of  the  world;  her  great¬ 
ness,  glory,  grandeur,  and  majesty 
have  been  almost,  though  not  abso¬ 
lutely,  all  that  in  these  respects  the 
world  has  had  to  boast  of.  Her 
children  are  more  numerous  than  all 
{he  members  of  the  sects  combined, 
and  she  is  every  day  enlarging  the 
boundaries  of  her  vast  empire.  Her 
altars  are  raised  in  every  clime,,  and 
her  missionaries  are  to  be  found  wher¬ 
ever  there  are  men  to  be  taught  the 
evangel  of  immortality  and  souls  are 
to  be  saved.  And  this  wondrous 
Church,  which  is  as  old  as  Christian¬ 
ity  and  as  universal  as  mankind,  is 
to-day,  after  twenty  centuries  of  age, 
as  fresh  and  vigorous  and  as  fruitful 
as  on  the  day  when  the  Pentecostal 
fires  were  showered  upon  the  earth. 
Surely  such  an  institution  challenges 
the  attention  and  demands  and  de¬ 
serves  the  most  serious  examination 
of  those  outside  its  pale.” 

Lord  Macauley  (Protestant)  on  the 
Catholic  Church. 

Extract  from  the  Protestant  Histor¬ 
ian,  Lord  Macauley’s  Essay  on  the 
Pope: 

“There  is  not,  and  there  never  was, 
on  this  earth  a  work  of  human  policy 
so  well  deserving  of  examination  as 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  The  his¬ 
tory  of  that  Church  joins  together  the 
two  great  ages  of  human  civilization. 
No  other  institution  is  left  standing 
(which  carries  the  mind  back  to  the 
times  -when  the  smoke  of  sacrifice 
rose  from  the  Pantheon,  and  when 
c&meteopards  and  tigers  abounded  in 
the  Flavian  amphitheatre.  The  proud¬ 


est  royal  houses  are  but  of  yesterday 
when  compared  with  the  line  of  Su¬ 
preme  Pontiffs.  That  line  we  trace 
back  in  an  unbroken  series  from  the 
Pope  who  crowned  Napoleon  in  the 
nineteenth  century  to  the  Pope  who 
crowned  Pepin  in  the  eighth;  and  far 
beyond  the  time  of  Pepin  the  august 
dynasty  extends  till  it  is  lost  in  the 
twilight  of  fable.  The  Republic  of 
Venice  came  next  in  antiquity.  But 
the  Republic  of  Venice  was  modern 
when  compared  to  the  Papacy;  and 
the  Republic  of  Venice  is  gone,  and 
the  Papacy  remains.  The  Papacy  re¬ 
mains,  not  in  decay,  not  a  mere  an¬ 
tique,  but  full  of  life  and  youthful 
vigor. 

“The  Catholic  Church  is  still  send¬ 
ing  forth  to  the  farthest  end  of  the 
world  missionaries  as  zealous  as  those 
who  landed  in  Kent  with  Augustine, 
and  still  confronting  hostile  king® 
with  the  same  spirit  with  which  she 
confronted  Attila.  The  number  of 
her  children  is  greater  than  in  any 
former  age. 

“Her  acquisitions  in  the  New  World 
have  more  than  compensated  for  what 
she  has  lost  in  the  Old.  Her  spiritual 
ascendancy  extends  over  the  vast 
countries  which  lie  between  the  plain® 
of  the  Missouri  and  Cape  Horn — coun¬ 
tries  which,  a  century  hence,  may  not 
improbably  contain  a  population  as 
large  as  that  which  now  inhabits- 
Europe.  The  members  of  her  com¬ 
munion  are  certainly  not  fewer  than 
a  hundred  and  fifty  millions;  and  it 
will  be  difficult  to  show  that  all  other 
Christian  sects  united  amounted  to  a 
hundred  and  twenty  millions.  Nor  do 
we  see  any  sign  which  indicates  that 
the  end  of  her  long  dominion  is  ap¬ 
proaching.  She  saw  the  commence¬ 
ment  of  all  the  governments  and  of 
all  the  ecclesiastical  establishments 
that  now  exist  in  the  world;  and  w© 
feel  no  assurance  that  she  is  not  des¬ 
tined  to  see  the  end  of  them  all.  She* 
was  great  and  respected  before  the 
Saxon  had  set  foot  on  Britain,  before 
the  Frank  had  passed  the  Rhine,  when; 
Grecian  eloquence  still  flourished  at 
Antioch,  when  idols  were  still  wor¬ 
shipped  in  the  temple  of  Mecca.  And 
she  may  still  exist  in  undiminished 
vigor  when  some  traveler  from  New 
Zealand  shall,,  in  the  midst  of  a  vast 
solitude,  take  his  stand  on  a  broken 
arch  of  London  Bridge  to  sketch  the 
ruins  of  St.  Paul’s.” 

Again  he  writes: 

“Four  times  since  the  authority  of 
the  Church  of  Rome  was  established 


52 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION 

on  Western  Christendom  has  the  hu* 
man  intellect  risen  up  against  her 
yoke.  Twice  that  Church  remained 
completely  victorious.  Twice  she 
came  forth  from  the  conflict  bearing 
the  marks  of  cruel  wounds,  bul  with 
the  principle  of  life  still  strong  within 
her.  When  we  reflect  on  the  tre¬ 
mendous  assaults  she  has  survived,  we 
find  it  difficult  to  conceive  in  what 
way  she  is  to  perish.” 

Front  the  Ave  Maria,  May  28th.  190  1. 

“Are  Catholics  wrong  in  supporting 
parish  schools  at  great  expense?” 
asks  the  editor  of  the  New  England 
Journal.  And  he  answers:  ‘‘Not  if  a 
man*  be  worth  more  than  a  dog.”  The 
whole  passage  is  so  striking  that  we 
feel  obliged  to  quote  it  in  full: 

‘‘But  there  is  one  Church  which 
makes  religion  an  essential  in  educa¬ 
tion,  and  that  is  the  Catholic  Church, 
in  which  the  mothers  teach  their  faith 
to  the  infants  at  the  breast  in  their 
lullaby  songs,  and  whose  brotherhoods 
and  priests,  sisterhoods  and  nuns,  im¬ 
print  their  religion  on  souls  as  indel¬ 
ibly  aa  the  dfamond  marks  the  hard¬ 
ened  glass.  They  ingrain  their  faith 
in  human  hearts  when  most  plastic  to 
the  touch.  Are  they  wrong,  are  they 
stupid,  are  they  ignorant,  that  they 
found  parochial  schools,  convents, 
colleges,  in  which  religion  is  taught? 
Not  if  a  man  be  worth  more  than  a 
dog,  or  the  human  soul,  with  eternity 
for  duration,  is  of  more  value  than  the 
span  of  animal  existence  for  a  day.  If 
they  are  right  and  we  are  wrong;  if 
our  Puritan  fathers  were  wise,  then 
we  are  foolish.  Looking  upon  it  as  a 
mere  speculative  question,  with  their 
policy  they  will  increase;  with  ours, 
we  will  decrease.  Macaulay  predict¬ 
ed  the  endurance  of  the  Catholic 
Church  till  the  civilized  Australian 
should  sketch  the  ruins  of  London 
from  a  broken  arch  of  London  bridge. 
We  are  no  prophet,  but  it  does  seem 
to  us  that  Catholics,  retaining  their 
religious  teaching  and  we  our  heath¬ 
en  schools,  will  gaze  upon  cathedral 
crosses  all  over  New  England  when 
our  meeting  houses  will  be  turned  in¬ 
to  barns.  Let  them  go  on  teaching 
their  religion  to  the  children  and  let 
us  go  on  educating  our  children  in 
schools  without  a  recognition  of  God 
and  without  the  reading  of  the  Bible, 
and  they  -will  plant  corn  and  train 
grapevines  on  the  unknown  graves  of 
Plymouth  Pilgrims  and  of  the  Puri¬ 
tans  of  Massachusetts  Bay,  and  none 
will  dispute  their  right  of  possession. 
We  say  this  without  expressing  our 
own  hopes  or  fears,  but  as  inevitable 
from  the  fact  that  whatsoever  a  man 
soweth  tbit  shall  he  also  reap.” 


AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 

PROTESTANTS  AND  THE  PUBLIC 
SCHOOLS. 

From  Sacred  Heart  Review,  June 
4th,  1904. 

We  find  the  Rev.  John  C.  Kilgo,  D. 
D.,  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church,,  South,  reported  as  saying  re¬ 
cently: 

‘‘The  school  question  is  a  far-reach¬ 
ing  issue,  involving  the  ideals  and 
tyx>e  of  American  civilization.  if 
these  schools  continue  to  secularlize 
the  ideals  sympathies  and  purposes 
of  childhood  and  youth,  the  pros¬ 
pects  are  gloomy  enough.  The  found¬ 
ers  of  this  republic  never  dreamed 
that  the  idea  of  the  separation  of 
Church  and  State  meant  any  sort  of 
civil  allegiance  with  infidelity  or  non-  . 
religious  classes.  The  separation  of 
Church  and  State  was  never  designed 
to  be  bitter  antagonism  between 
Church  and  State,  and  to  yield  the 
point  is  to  surrender  the  nation  into 
the  hands  of  those  classes  who  are 
least  fitted  to  have  it  in  their  charge. 
The  churches  should  lose, 'no  time  in 
turning  back  the  tide  of  secularism 
which  has  already  grown  to  alarming 
proportions.” 


Methodist  Praise  for  Catholics. 

A  motion  to  censure  the  school 
policy  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
in  this  country  was  resisted  by  a  good 
majority  of  the  Methodist  General 
Conference,  which  continued  its  ses¬ 
sions  at  Los  Angeles  during  the  past 
week.  The  motion  was  made  by  the 
Rev.  J.  R.  King.  secretary  of  the 
Church  Extension  Society  of  Phila¬ 
delphia.  Chief  Justice  Lore,  of  Dela¬ 
ware,  won  hearty  applause,  however, 
by  asserting  that  the  Catholic  Church 
had  taken  hold  of  a  class  of  people 
‘‘that  no  other  form  of  religion  could 
have  moulded  so  well  for  the  well¬ 
being  of  our  common  land.”  He 
would  support  every  evangelizing 
agency  that  helps  to  uplift  man.  The 
resolution  was  tabled. 

The  Future  Belongs  to  the  Church — 
(Catholic.) 

From  Sacred  Heart  Review,  June 
4th,  1904. 

‘‘The  burden  of  organizing  and  sup¬ 
porting  a  first-rate  parish  school  is 
one,”  says  the  Ave  Maria,  ‘that  often 
weighs  heavily  on  both  pastor  and 
people;  but  is  is  a  necessary  burden. 
The  future  belongs  to  the  Church  by 
many  titles,  but  by  none  more  un¬ 
mistakably  than  because  she  is  form¬ 
ing  the  men  and  women  of  the  future 
to  religion  by  systematic  instruction 
and  practice  from  infancy.  Every 
Catholic  school  today  means  a  dozen 
flourishing  parishes  thirty  years  from 
today.” 


I 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION  AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR  5.5. 


GLORIOUS  PAGE  IN  THE 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CHURCH 


Grand  Exhibit  of  Devotion  to  the 
Cause  of  Religious  Ed  neat  ion  by 
the  Catholics  of  the  United 
States. 


Rev.  Charles  Coppens,  S.  J.,  in  the 
New  Voice. 

Catholics  have  every  reason  to  con¬ 
gratulate  themselves  on  the  good 
work  they  have  done  in  behalf  of  re¬ 
ligious  education.  There  is  scarcely 
in  history  a  grander  exhibit  of  devo¬ 
tion  to  this  noble  cause  than  the  sys¬ 
tem  of  parochial  schools,  colleges  and 
universities  built  up  and  supported  by 
Catholic  effort  and  money,  unaided 
by  government  support,  all  over  the 
United  States.  There  is  nothing  like 
this  achievement  either  here  or  any¬ 
where  else.  And  if  it  be  remembered 
that  within  the  last  fifty  or  sixty  years 
<  latholics  have  had  to  provide,  and 
have  provided,  the  finest  church  build¬ 
ings  ni  the  land,  the  most  substantial 
land  most  elegant,  both  in  large  cities 
and  in  ten  thousand  smaller  towns;  if 
it  be  remembered  that  meanwhile 
they  have  enabled  the  Bishops  to  give 
a  more  thorough  education  to  their 
clergy  than  is  done  by  other  denomi¬ 
nations;  if  it  be  remembered  that  all 
■this  has  been  accomplished  by  the  wil¬ 
ling  contributions  of  the  faithful,  rich 
and  poor,  working  on  generously  and 
'.steadily  in  the  rivalry  of  mutual  good 
•will;  if  it  be  remembered,  too,  that  all 
this  time  they  had  been  handicapped 
by  the  tax  imposed  on  them  for  the 
building  and  supporting  of  the  secu¬ 
lar  system  of  schools  to  which  they 
cannot  in  conscience  send  their  own 
children,  they  fieel  convinced  that  the 
pages  recording  these  results  will  be 
among  the  most  glorious  read  in  the 
history  of  the  Church. 

As  a  consequence.  Catholics  are 
reaping  consoling  fruits  from  all  these 
labors  and  sacrifices.  The  condition 
of  the  Church  in  this  land,  whether  as 
regards  its  material  improvements, 
its  mental  eminence,  its  moral  in¬ 
fluence,  the  multitude  of  its  societies, 
the  commanding  excellence  of  its 
clergy,  the  affection  and  devotedness 
of  its  laity,  is  a  source  of  deep  conso¬ 
lation,  a  thing  of  beauty  in  the  sight 
of  angels  and  of  men. 

If  others  will,  not  co-operate  with 
them  in  promoting  religious  educa¬ 
tion,  then  let  them  steadily  look  the 
fact  in  the  face  that  religion  is  losing 
its  hold  on  the  country;  after  awhile 
there  will  be  no  Christianity  in  the 
United  States  but  that  of  the  Catholic 
Church. 


CATHOLIC  S  ATTACKED 

IN  M.  E.  CONFERENCE 


Dr.  King,  of  Philadelphia,  Vigorously 

Criticises  Vicar  General  Harnett — 
Justice  Lore  Replies. 

Los  Angeles,  May  9.— A  Philadel¬ 
phia  clergyman,  the  Rev.  Dr.  J.  M. 
King,  secretary  of  the  Board  of 
Church  Extension,  created  a  sensation 
as  soon  as  the  devotional  services 
ended  this  morning  in  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  General  Conference. 

Dr.  King  began  by  reading  from  a, 
letter  written  by  the  Rev.  Peter  Har¬ 
nett,  vicar  general  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  diocese  of  Monterey  and  Los 
Angeles,  to  a  local  newspaper  yester¬ 
day,  and  based  upon  an  utterance  of 
the  Episcopal  address  read  before  the 
conference  by  Bishop  Foss  last 
Thursday. 

In  this  letter  Father  Harnett  took 
exception  to  the  statement  in  the  ad¬ 
dress  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
is  opposed  to  the  public  school  system 
of  America. 

Dr.  King  Attacks  Catholic  Church. 

Dr.  King  made  a  spirited  attack  on 
Vie  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  de¬ 
clared  that  the  assertions  of  Father 
Harnett  were  contradicted  by  the* 

facts  in  the  case. 

% 

He  elaborated  to  some  extent  upon 
the  statement  that  the  Catholic 
Church  did  not  interfere  in  politics, 
and  concluded  by  reading  a  resolution 
embodying  his  views  upon  the  subject, 
which  he  desired  the  conference  to- 
adopt. 

When  Dr.  King  finished  reading  his 
resolution  there  was  a  commotion 
among  the  delegates  and  a  hum  of 
conversation  and  cries  of  “No,  no." 
A  score  of  delegates  were  on  their 
feet  in  an  instant  clamoring  for  rec¬ 
ognition  from  Bishop  Fowler,  who 
was  presiding. 

Chief  Justice  Lore  Deplores  Attack. 

Chief  Justice  Charles  B.  Lore,  of 
the  Delavrare  State  Supreme  Court,  a 
lay  delegate,  made  a  strong  speech  in 
opposition  to  Dr.  King’s  stand. 

“In  regard  to  Dr.  King’s  state¬ 
ment  upon  the  Roman  Catholic  oppo¬ 
sition  to  the  public  school  system  in 
America,’’  said  Justice  Lore,  “I  am 
with  him,  but  I  believe  this  is  no  place 
nor  time  to  indulge  in  an  attack  on 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  or  any 
other  church. 

“I  believe  that  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  is  doing  a  great  work  in  this 
country  along  certain  lines,  and  we 
should  put  our  hands  under  it  and 
assist  it  or  any  other  church  in  a.. 
work  of  evangelization.’’ 


54 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION  AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


TO  UNIVERSITY  GRADUATES. 

Yonkers  Home  Journal  and  News, 
June  25,  1904. 

Rev.  Alexander  P.  Doyle,  C.  S.  P., 
of  the  Apostolic  Mission  House,  Wash¬ 
ington,  delivered  the  address  to  the 
graduates  at  the  Catholic  University 
of  America.  He  said  of  the  Univer¬ 
sity  and  its  mission: 

“It  might  have  been  formed  on  the 
model  of  the  hundred  other  universi¬ 
ties  that  flourish  in  this  country  in 
which  the  scientific  method  is  the  be- 
all  and  the  end-all  of  the  training.  It 
would  then  have  possessed  no  char¬ 
acter  or  individuality  of  its  own.  I 
do  not  mean  in  any  sense  to  depre¬ 
cate  the  value  of  the  scientific  meth¬ 
od  as  such,  but  if  the  natural  order 
and  observation  alone  are  made  the 
sole  sources  of  knowledge,  as  is  done 
in  secular  universities,  we  are  of  a 
necessity  obliged  to  throw  out  of  court 
a  large  percentage  of  religious  truth 
that  moulds  our  lives  far  more  inti¬ 
mately  and  effectually  than  do  the  or¬ 
dinary  facts  whose  existence  we  may 
demonstrate  by  unaided  natural  rea¬ 
son.  What  would;  become  of  such  great 
truths  as  the.,;  immortality  of  man’s 
soul,  of  the  Incarnation  of  the  Christ¬ 
man,  of  the  existence  of  original  sin, 
of  the  virgin  birth  "of  Christ,  the  ex¬ 
istence  of ‘  miracles,  and  a  thousand 
find-  one  great  religious  truths  that  in 
nowise  can  be  brought  under  the 
scrutiny  of  the  microscopes  or  be  di¬ 
vided  into  cells  and  tissues  by  the 
scalpel ? 

“Little  wonder  that  these  numerous 
secular  universities  are  turning  out  a 
race  of  infidels  who  live  for  this  world, 
and,  in  dying,  go  into  oblivion.  Little 
wonder  that  the  great  fact  of  religion 
and  all  that  it  stands  for  are  being- 
washed  out  of  our  American  life.  Lit¬ 
tle  wonder  that  the  ideals  of  living 
are  rapidly  changing,  and  that  exter¬ 
nal  respectability  is  thought  more  of 
than  internal  goodness  of  heart:  that 
personal  comfort  and  convenience  are 
to  be  attained  even  if  the  external 
laws  of  God  go  down  in  the  struggle; 
that  the  Gospel  of  clean  linen  is  far 
better  than  that  of  a  clean  heart;  that 
the  prevailing-  and  accepted  maxims 
are  get  rich  honestly,  but  get  rich; 
the  most  useful  political  factor  is  the 
man  who  is  shrewd  enough  not  to  get 
caught  with  the  goods  on  him. 

“The  practical  recognition  of  a  God 
who  does  shape  our  ends  and  who 
does  enter  into  the  daily  affairs  of 
our  lives;  who  is  not  merely  a  mem¬ 
ory  or  even  a  moving  presence,  but  is 
more  an  ever-living  and  ever-ooerat- 
ive  force  in  our  lives,  gives  a  reality  to 
the  other  side  of  the  tapestry  that  is 
hidden  from  our  earthly  eyes;  and 
what  though  the  seamy  side  is  turned 


towards  us  and  we  do  see  what  we- 
consider  evidences  of  unskillful  han¬ 
diwork,  still,  we  know  that  the  Artist 
of  supreme  wisdom  who  has  at  His 
command  infinite  power,  will  bring  all 
things  out  right  in  the  end.  The  whole 
system  of  education,  from  the  kinder¬ 
garten  up  through  the  common  school 
into  the  college  and  the  university, 
the  system  that  has  the  approbation 
and  commendation  of  the  American 
people,  has  ‘no  God  in  its  knowledge,’ 
and  herein  lies  the  appalling  danger 
and  catastrophe  that  we  are  facing  as 
a  people. 

“Our  great  national  peril  is  not  di¬ 
vorce,  blighting  as  it  is.  It  is  not 
intemperance,  degrading  as  it  is;  not 
the  desecration  of  the  Sunday,  cor¬ 
rupting  as  it  is;  it  is  not  dishonesty  in 
high  places,  damaging  as  it  is;  it  is 
not  the  prostitution  of  high  ideals  of 
chastity,  withering  as  it  is;  but  it  is 
because  they  would  have  no  God  in 
their  knowledge,  and  therefore,  as  the 
Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  prophesies, 
they  are  given  up  to  a  reprobate  sense. 
All  the  brood  of  civic  and  national 
evils  flow  from  this  chief  one  as  a 
fountain  head. 

“A  great  institution  that  will  be 
placed  on  high  in  the  capital  of  the 
nation  as  a  city  set  on  the  mountain 
side  in  the  full  glare  of  the  noonday 
sun,  whose  presence  will  fill  every 
eye  and  which  the  nation  cannot 
ignore,  and  whose  existence  it  cannot 
erase,  is  necessary  as  a  national  pro¬ 
test  against  the  banishment  of  God 
from  the  nation's  life.  In  spirit  it 
must  not  be  just  one  more  university. 
It  must  stand  with  an  individuality 
all  its  own  for  religion.  Let  the  sci¬ 
entific  method  be  used  to  the  very  ut¬ 
most  in  its  training,  as  an  illustrious 
predecessor  in  the  Catholic  universi¬ 
ty  of  the  Middle  Age  used  the  Aristo¬ 
telian  method  with  such  marvelous 
skill  against  the  infidels  of  his  day; 
and  with  such  completeness,  too,  that 
it  has  ever  since  reformed  both  the 
terms  and  ideas,  not  only  of  philos¬ 
ophy  but  of  scientific  theology;  but 
into  it  must  be  injected  the  truth  of 
faith  and  revelation.  The  Catholic 
University  must  continue  to  give  re¬ 
ligion  its  honored  place  in  its  curric¬ 
ulum  of  studies.  It  must  be  the  most 
earnest  supporter  of  the  supernatural 
in  our  lives.  It  must  be  written  all 
over  with  the  cross  of  the  Crucified 
One.  It  must  be  the  defender  of  the 
hidden  verities  and  the  unseen  influ¬ 
ences  in  our  lives  that  do  so  much 
to  mould  and  fashion  us  not  only  in¬ 
dividually  but  as  a  nation. 

“The  Catholic  University  has  not 
been  started  one  hour  too  soon  to  do 
this  work,  nor  are  the  vast  sums  of 
money  invested  here  one  cent  too 
p-’uch  to  secure  these  results.  This  is 
our  contribution  to  good  citizenship* 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION  AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


5  5 


find  while  it  is  somewhat  the  measure 
■of  our  ability  it  is  not  by  any  means 
the  measure  of  our  desire  and  solici¬ 
tude  for  the  welfare  of  our  country. 
The  men  who  go  forth  from  these 
classic  halls  must  be,  therefore,  men 
of  faith  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the 
word.  University  life  and  training 
should  make  you  men  of  the  pro- 
foundest  faith,  for  you  have  a  mission 
as  leaders  of  the  people  that  is 
grounded  on  nothing  else  but  a  vivid 
faith  in  Christ,  and  through  this 
same  faith  it  acquires  a  virility  to 
withstand  defeat  and  disappointment, 
to  rise  above  disaster,  and  to  persist 
in  a  sweet  and  wholesome  optimistic 
spirit  to  the  end  that  brings  with  it 
victory." 


CULT  IRK  NOT  SUFFICIENT. 

From  the  Methodist  Christian  Advo¬ 
cate. 

Culture  is  good,  but  we  must  not 
hope  to  find  in  it  that  which  it  cannot 
.give.  A  recent  writer  tells  of  the  de¬ 
cay  of  churches  in  certain  rural  dis¬ 
tricts,  but  does  not  seem  to  regret 
very  much  the  fact.  He  says  moral¬ 
ity  shows  no  sign  of  decay  in  those  re¬ 
gions,  because  the  public  schools  still 
flourish.  His  hope  for  those  commu¬ 
nities  appears  to  be  not  in  religion, 
but  in  culture.  But  culture  will  not 
save  a  soul.  Communities  have  de¬ 
cayed  in  morals  and  life  while  culture 
flourished  among  them.  But  no  com¬ 
munity  ever  decayed  while  the  Christ¬ 
ian  religion  flourished  in  the  midst. 
True  Christians  are  the  salt  of  the 
earth.  It  is  the  grace  of  God  in  the 
heart,  and  not  knowledge  in  the 
head,  that  saves. 


ENTERS  A  PLEA  FOR 

C  A  T  H  OLIC  SC  I  I OOLS. 

Priest  Calls  for  Financial  Recognition 
By  State. 

From  Phila.  Public  Ledger,  June  30, 

1904. 

Rev.  Philip  R.  McDevitt  made  a 
plea  for  “financial  recognition’’  of 
Catholic  parish  schools  by  the  State 
yesterday  morning  at  the  closing  ses¬ 
sion  of  the  State  Convention  of  Cath¬ 
olic  Societies,  in  St.  James’  Hall, 
Thirty-eighth  and  Market  streets.  His 
remarks  aroused  enthusiastic  ap¬ 
plause. 

“In  seeking  some  financial  recog¬ 
nition  for  their  schools,”  said  the 
superintendent  of  parish  schools  in 
the  Archdiocese  of  Philadelphia, 
■“Catholics  are  but  asking  that  their 
own  money,  not  other  people's,  shall 
be  applied  to  the  education  of  the 
children  of  the  nation. 


“Who  shall  say  that  they  ask  more 
than  their  right?  The  State  is  not 
the  absolute  master  of  all  moneys  in 
its  treasury.  It  is  the  custodian  only, 
and  justice  requires  that  the  moneys 
raised  by  general  taxation  be  distrib¬ 
uted  according  to  the  reasonable  and 
just  wishes  of  the  taxpayers.  Our 
opposition  to  the  existing  st»ate  of  af¬ 
fairs  proceeds  from  no  sinister,  sel¬ 
fish  purpose. 

Sees  Prejudice  and  Partisanship. 

“The  history  of  the  agitation  con¬ 
cerning  denominational  schools  can¬ 
not  but  make  Catholics  think  that 
partisan  feeling  and  religious  preju¬ 
dices,  and  not  the  merits  of  the  ques¬ 
tion,  have  brought  about  the  present 
state  of  public  opinion,  the  unwilling¬ 
ness  to  look  calmly  and  justly  on  the 
claims  of  the  Catholic  minority.  It 
is  a  notorious  fact  that  the  so-called 
‘non -sectarian’  character  was  given 
to  our  State  system  of  education  only 
when  Catholics  asked,  in  justice,  for 
such  consideration  as  was  accorded  to 
the  Protestant  sects. 

“The  common  objection  to  the  ap¬ 
propriation  of  any  money  from  the 
public  treasury  to  denominational 
schools  is  that  such  an  act  would  be 
a  violation  of  the  fundamental  law 
of  the  land,  which  recognizes  no  re¬ 
ligion  or  sect.  The  government’s  ba¬ 
sis  is  broad,  ignoring  party  and  creed. 
Does  it  ever  occur  to  those  who  in¬ 
sist  on  this  view  that  the  very  policy 
of  excluding  religious  instruction 
from  schools  maintained  by  a  general 
taxation  is  a  de  facto  class  legislation 
in  favor  of  unbelievers  and  agnostics, 
and  utterly  opposed  to  the  principles 
of  Christian  denominations?  Unbe¬ 
lief  is  actually  some  kind  of  belief. 
Consequently,  may  not  the  mass  of 
Christians  justly  protest  against  a 
system  which  permits  any  State  in¬ 
stitutions  becoming  tacitly  an  agency 
for  the  spread  of  infidelity? 

Difficulties  Should  Not  He  a  Bar. 

“It  is  said  that  the  official  machin¬ 
ery  required  to  carry  out  a  system 
all  these  countries  denominational 
schools  would  be  so  complicated  as  to 
be  practically  impossible  because  of 
the  multitude  of  sects  in  the  country 
which  would  claim  recognition.  Any 
agency  which  will  meet  the  require¬ 
ments  of  the  State  in  the  amount  and 
character  of  the  education  demanded 
ought  to  receive  recognition.  The 
difficulties  incidental  to  such  recog¬ 
nition  should  not  rule  out  of  court 
any  just  claim. 

“All  that  is  asked  is  simply  the 
recognition  pf  results  secured  in  good 
educational  work.  It  is  a  good  policy, 
affirmed  over  and  over  again  in  mu¬ 
nicipal  administration,  to  utilize  ex¬ 
isting  agencies.  A  hospital,  though 
it  be  under  denominational  control. 


-5  6 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION  AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR 


Las  facilities  to  treat  accidents.  The 
-city  authorizes  it  to  run  a  public  am¬ 
bulance  and  pays  for  the  public  ser¬ 
vice  it  renders.  Why  not  apply  the 
same  principle  in  matters  of  educa¬ 
tion?  It  makes  no  difference  to  a 
municipality  what  particular  form  of 
religion  is  taught  as  long  as  good  citi¬ 
zenship  is  cultivated:  and  if  a  corpo¬ 
ration  of  men  will  give  as  good  an 
education,  when  tested  by  examina¬ 
tion,  as  the  common  school,  why  not 
compensate  them  for  the  work  done? 

They  Arc  Recognized  Abroad. 

“There  is  no  argument  against  the 
system.  What  is  done  in  England, 
Germany  and  Canada  should  not  be 
impossible  in  the  United  States.  In 
all  these  countries  denominational 
schools  are  recognized.  No  unanswer¬ 
able  argument  has  ever  been  adduced 
which  destroys  the  justice  of  the 
Catholic  claim  in  the  matter  of  edu¬ 
cation.  There  is  a  just  solution  of 
the  difficulty.  Catholics  are  not 
clamoring  for  what  is  unjust  or  un¬ 
reasonable.  The  Catholic  school  sys¬ 
tem  cannot  be  ignored  by  the  State;  it 
is  a  fact,  a  mighty  fact.  The  Catholic 
Church  is  contending  for  a  principle 
from  which  she  can  never  recede. 

“The  Catholic  school  has  come  to 
stay.  There  are  men  in  the  non- 
Catholic.  educational  world  who 
would  regret  little  if  it  were  wiped 
out  of  existence.  They  have  scant  re¬ 
spect  for  private  effort  in  education. 
Their  belief  is  that  the  State  should 
he  the  only  educational  agency,  but, 
thank  God,  the  free,  untrammeled 
and  unfettered  Catholics  of  America 
are  not  under  the  domination  of  an 
atheistic  oligarchy,  as  are  the  Catho¬ 
lics  of  France,  and  the  day  is  far  off 
■when  the  State  will  dare  legislate  out 
of  existence  the  Catholic  school  sys¬ 
tem. 

“With  the  unauestionable  fact  be¬ 
fore  it  of  a.  great  religious  organiza¬ 
tion  educating  today  more  than  1.- 
000,000  children  by  a  system  of  edu¬ 
cation  that  is  keeping  pace  with  every 
phase  of  the  marvelous  development 
of  the  country,  it  behooves  the  states¬ 
men  of  the  land  to  consider  what  is 
the  right  and  just  attitude  to  assume 
toward  the  Catholic  school  system. 
By  judicious  encouragement,  by  help¬ 
ful  sympathy,  by  financial  aid  and 
proper  supervision  of  private  schools, 
the  State  can  accomplish  all  that  is 
achieved  by  its  assuming  complete 
control  of  education;  yet  by  this  mode 
-of  procedure  it  would  avoid  interfer¬ 
ing  with  the  parental  rights  and  con¬ 
scientious  belief  of  its  citizens. 


Cliurcli  Will  Not  Change. 

“Whether  recognition  come  or  not, 
the  Catholic  Church  will  continue  her 
mission  of  educating  the  children  of 
the  rapidly  growing  population.  If 
the  State  be  sincere  in  the  declaration 
that  it  looks  to  the  welfare  of  the 
whole  people,  Catholic  education  will 
yet  receive  proper  consideration.  May 
the  day  soon  dawn  when  America  and 
Americans  will  clearly  se*e  what  the 
Catholic  Church  has  done  in  her  par¬ 
ish  schools  for  the  family  and  the 
State  by  jealously  guarding  the  moral, 
religious  and  intellectual  welfare  of 
the  child,  and  when  all  will  recognize 
the  necessity  and  permanence  of  the 
Catholic  parish  school. 

“The  city  of  Philadelphia  is  sup¬ 
posed  to  afford  to  every  child  a  free 
education  at  the  city’s  expense.  Every 
child  has  the  same  constitutional  right 
to  this  free  education.  In  this  re¬ 
spect  all  are  equal  before  the  lawq 
without  regard  to  color,  creed  or  na¬ 
tionality.  The  enrollment  in  the  pub¬ 
lic  schools  of  Philadelphia  is  161.066. 
The  school  expenses  of  Philadelphia, 
according  to  the  latest  report  (Public 
Ledger,  June  20,  1904,)  were  $4,722.- 
500.85. 

40.000  in  Parish  Schools. 

“At  this  moment  there  are  40,000 
children  in  the  parish  schools  of  Phil¬ 
adelphia.  The  parents  of  these  chil¬ 
dren,  while  paying  the  taxes  which  all 
citizens  must  pay,  and  thereby  sup¬ 
port  the  public  schools,  are  at  the 
same  time  educating  at  their  own  ex¬ 
pense  40,000  children.  What  does  this 
mean?  A  short  while  ago  I  obtained 
from  a  few'  pastors  the  estimated  cost 
of  certain  parish  school  buildings. 
The  aggregate  cost  of  ten  Catholic 
parish  school  buildings  was  $501,200. 
The  number  of  children  attending 
these  schools  was  7,368.  There  are 
sixty-two  parish  school  buildings  in 
Philadelphia,  with  an  enrollment  of 
almost  40.000.  .  Now,  if  it  cast.  th< 

city  of  Philadelphia  almost  $5,000,000 
to  educate  161,066  children,  what 
would  it  cost  to  educate  40,000  more, 
and  to  erect  buildings  to  give  them 
accommodations?  Yet  these  40,000 
have  the  same  right  to  a  free  educa¬ 
tion  as  the  160,000  in  the  public 
schools.  With  these  facts  in  mind,  we 
can  rapidly  believe  the  statement  of 
a  recent  writer  that  in  the  past  twen¬ 
ty  3'ears  the  Catholics  o-f  America  have 
spent  on  to  $300,000,000  for  parish 
school  education.  W'hat  a  splendid 
lesson  of  self-sacrifice!” 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION  AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR. 


57 


RT.  UEV.  MICHAEL  J.  HOIi AN.  1).  D.. 


Bishop  of  Scranton,  at  the  Annual 

Dinner  Given  by  the  New  England 
Society  of  Northeastern  Penn¬ 
sylvania  on  Dec.  21,  1900, 

Said  in  Part: 

“The  President,  in  his  remarks  to¬ 
night,  alluded  to  the  fact  that  the 
Pilgrim  Fathers  brought  here  the  Free 
Public  School  System,  and  I  say 
‘God  bless  them’  for  having  done  so. 
You  will  no  doubt  agree  with  me 
that  in  a  republic  it  is  not  only  the 
privilege,  but  it  is  the  absolute  duty 
of  every  citizen  to  know  how  to  read 
and  write;  but  when  the  Pilgrims 
brought  that  institution  here  it  was 
not  an  American  idea;  in  fact,  the 
Free  Public  School  System,  as  now  in 
existence  in  these  United  States,  can¬ 
not  be  said  to  have  become  an  Am¬ 
erican  institution  until  in  compara¬ 
tively  late  years.  •  Before  our  Civil 
War  there  was  no  such  system  in  the 
South,  as  far  as  I  can  learn;  it  was  a 
New  England  adaptation;  it  was  not 
original  with  the  Pilgrim  Fathers, 
neither  did  they  take  it  from  England, 
because  at  the  time  they  fled  from  the 
persecution  of  James  I  no  free  public 
school  system  existed  in  England. 
The  free  monastic  schools  had  been 
destroyed  by* Henry,  and  nothing  had 
been  substituted  for  them.  When  the 
Pilgrims  went  to  Holland,  in  1609, 
they  found  a  system  of  public  schools 
in  existence  fostered  and  encouraged 
by  the  authorities  of  the  State.  It 
was  probably  aided  by  the  noteworthy 
letter  which  John  of  Nassau,  the  old¬ 
est  brother  of  William  the  Silent,  the 
noble  veteran  who  lived  until  1606, 
wrote  to  his  son,  Louis  William,  Stadt- 
holder  of  Friesland.  In  this  letter, 
which  is  worthy  of  a  place  on  the 
walls  of  every  school  house  in  Am¬ 
erica,  the  gallant  young  Stadtholder  is 
‘instructed  to  urge  on  the  States  Gen¬ 
eral  that  they,  according  to  the  ex¬ 
ample  of  the  Pope  and  Jesuits,  should 
establish  free  schools,  where  children 
of  quality  as  well  as  of  poor  families, 
for  a  very  small  sum,  could  be  well 
and  Christianly  educated  and  brought 
up.  This  would  be  the  greatest  and 
most  useful  work  and  the  highest  ser¬ 
vice  that  you  could  ever  accomplish  for 
God  and  Christianity,  and  especially 
for  the  Netherlands  themselves.  In 
summa,  one  may  jeer  at  this  Popish 
trickery,  and,  undervalue  it  as  one 
will,  there  still  remains  in  the  work 
ar.  inexpressible  benefit.  Soldiers  and 
patriots  Thus  educated,  with  a  true 


knowledge  of  God  and  a  Christian 
conscience — item,  churches  and 
schools,  good  libraries,  books  and 
printing  presses — are  better  than  all 
armies,  arsenals,  armories,  munitions, 
alliances  and  treaties  that  can  be  had 
or  imagined  in  the  world.’ 

“The  system  then  introduced  by  the 
Pope  and  the  Jesuits  has  been  in  ex¬ 
istence  ever  since,  and  probably  the 
only  country  in  the  world  where  every 
child  over  ten  years  of  age  can  read 
and  write  is  in  the  little  Catholic 
Duchy  of  Luxemburg.  When  th*^ 
Pilgrim  Fathers  established  a  system 
of  schools  in  their  colonies  they  sim¬ 
ply  introduced  a  system  prevalent 
among  the  Catholics  and  Protestants 
of  Holland,  and  that  system  was  that 
the  children  should  be  taught  not 
only  how  to  read  and  write,  but  also 
that  they  should  be  taught  the  ele¬ 
ments  of  morals  and  religion — in  a 
word,  that  the  whole  man  should  be 
educated,  mentally  and  spiritually, 
the  heart  as  well  as  the  head.  That 
is  precisely  the  Catholic  doctrine  to¬ 
day.  So  that  we  Catholics  are  the 
logical  successors  in  the  public  school 
system  of  your  Pilgrim  Fathers,  and 
we  believe  that  the  child  should  be 
educated,  not  only  in  reading  and 
writing,  but  also  in  subjecting  the 
body  to  the  will,  will  to  reason,  rea¬ 
son  to  faith,  and  all  to  charity,  which 
has  the  virtue  of  transforming  man 
into  God.  purified  with  an  infinite 
love.  I  know  that  there  is  an  ele¬ 
ment  of  secularism  abroad — that 
there  is  a  tendency  to  eliminate  the 
question  of  religion  from  the  public 
schools;  but  no  lover  of  his  country 
can  witness  our  young  people  day 
after  day  cultivating  their  heads  at 
the  possible  expense  of  their  hearts, 
eagerly  absorbing  the  knowledge  that 
may  bring  material  gain,  but  neglect¬ 
ing  the  more  useful  knowledge  of  the 
soul,  on  which  will  depend  their  eter¬ 
nal  happiness,  without  regretting  that 
the  sons  of  New  England  should  have 
permitted  the  original  system  intro¬ 
duced  by  their  forefathers  to  have 
developed  along  the  narrow  line  of 
mere  secular  instruction  to  the  ex¬ 
clusion  of  morals  and  religion.’’ 


The  New  York  Independent  of  July 
14th,  1904,  says  editorially: 

“We  cannot  touch  the  public  school 
system  today  without  a  full  compre¬ 
hension  that  it  must  be  readjusted  for 
moral  and  social  ends.  It  is  the 
school  and  not  the  State  which  today 
is  working  a  great  revolution — a  revo¬ 
lution  that  will  involve  not  only  the 
intellectual  but  the  moral  character 
of  the  nation.” 


IN  DEFENSE  OF  RELIGION  AND  THE  DIGNITY  OF  LABOR. 


RELIGION  AND  EDUCATION. 


From  “The  Catholic  News”  July 
16.  1904. 

Almost  every  week  is  fur¬ 
nished  striking-  evidence  of  the  fact 
that  leading  non-Catholic  educators 
and  thinkers  are  seriously  disturbed 
by  the  conditions  that  prevail  in  the 
secular  schools  and  colleges  of  the 
land.  These  men  have  discovered  that 
the  indifference  and  irreligion  of  the 
day  are  to  be  traced  to  these  institu¬ 
tions,  whence  knowledge  of  the  duty 
mankind  owes  to  God  is  carefully  hid¬ 
den.  At  the  centenary  of  the  Univer¬ 
sity  of  Vermont  the  Rev.  Dr.  George 
B.  Spalding,  of  Syracuse,  a  member  of 
the  university’s  class  of  1856, 
preached  a  discourse  in  which  he 
spoke  plainly  of  the  shortcomings  of 
the  past  century.  He  said: 

“It  must  be  confessed  that  the  nine¬ 
teenth  century  has  been  one  of  doubt 
and  questioning,  and  even  denial  of 
many  philosophical  systems  and 
spiritual  dogmas,  which  have  already 
seriously  disturbed  faith,  and  threaten 
to  destroy  faith  even  within  the  cen¬ 
tury  that  is  now  upon  us.  In  the  im¬ 
petus  of  free  thinking,  and  in  the  un¬ 
due  emphasis  given  to  the  worth  of 
the  individual,  of  his  rights  and  liber¬ 
ties,  we  have  already  lost  much  of 
deepest  sense  of  obligation  to  the  law 
of  God,  of  which  we  are  subjects,  and 
the  order  of  the  State  and  society,  of 
which  we  are  constituent  members. 
Excess  of  one  truth  is  ruin  to  any 
other  truth.  Anarchy  and  freedom 
lie  close  together.  The  giant  that 
brandishes  its  arms  over  us  as  a  peo¬ 
ple  is  lawlessness.  And  he  is  the  off¬ 
spring  of  the  very  liberty  which 
breeds  in  the  free  air  of  our  republic. 
The  holy  sanction  of  the  oath  of  of¬ 
fice  and  the  marriage  vow;  the  high 
pride  of  civic  honor  and  intelligence, 
seem  at  times  to  be  dead  or  dying — 
not  only  among  men  of  corrupt  lives, 
but  among  men  of  respectability  and 
public  position,  of  financial  trust  and 
government  authority.” 

Dr.  Spalding  believes  that  unless 
there  is  a  return  to  Christian  princi¬ 
ples  the  ruin  of  the  American  repub¬ 
lic  is  at  hand.  The  twentieth  cen¬ 
tury’s  challenge  is,  he  says,  “for  a 
largei,  higher  science  illumined  by 
Christian  faith,  which  shall  find  an 
interpretation  of  man  in  Jesus  Christ 
as  his  Saviour.  This  realm  of  phil¬ 
osophy  in  which  unbelief  has  so  long 
rioted,  but  is  now  so  sorely  worsted, 
‘is  waiting  for  the  manifestation  of 
the  sons  of  God.'  ” 

Another  Protestant  clergyman  em¬ 
phasizes  the  need  of  God  in  our  na¬ 
tional  life.  Preaching  in  the  First 
church.  Boston,  the  Rev.  Thomas  Van 


Ness  quoted  these  words  of  President 
Eliot,  of  Harvard  University:  “No 

educational  system  can  be  successful¬ 
ly  carried  on  without,  first,  education 
in  morals,  and  no  education  in  morals 
is  possible  without  the  religious  life.” 
Mr.  Van  Ness  regarded  these  words 
as  highly  significant;  in  fact,  as  .  if 
they  were  an  entirely  new  utterance. 
But  Catholics  have  for  years  and 
years  been  saying  the  same  thing. 
Until  of  late,  however,  they  were 
called  traitors  for  using  such  lan¬ 
guage.  Happily  their  view  is  now  en¬ 
dorsed  by  a  great  many  of  the  most 
eminent  Protestants  of  the  land.  Mr. 
Van  Ness  appreciates  the  weakness  of 
our  secular  educational  system,  for  he 
says:  “The  need  is  moralization,  not 

intellectualization;  the  education  of 
the  heart,  not  the  education  of  the 
hand.  The  pressing  problem  in 
America  is  how  shall  education  be 
moulded  so  that  it  shall  be  character¬ 
building?” 

The  attitude  of  these  men  on  the 
need  for  introducing  religion  into 
education  is  endorsed  by  no  less  an 
authority  than  President  James,  of  the 
famous  Methodist  institution,  North¬ 
western  University.  Addressing  the 
30,000  delegates  attending  the  recent 
St.  Louis  convention  of  the  National 
Educational  Association,  he  made  a 
strong  plea  for  a  return  to  the  old- 
fashioned  religious  education  in 
schools  and  colleges.  Dr.  James  said: 

“A  return  to  the  old  system,  where¬ 
by  the  Church  can  maintain  its  in¬ 
fluence  in  schools  and  colleges,  is 
needed.  Religious  schools  have  been 
relegated  to  the  rear.  Bring  them 
forward.  Make  them  felt  in  the  light 
of  the  world.  Put  them  in  touch 
with  the  religious  idea.  Schools  that 
are  endowed  and  non-sectarian 
schools  and  colleges  feel  the  need  of 
religious  thought.  Though  a  great 
change  has  been  taking  place  in  col¬ 
leges  and  schools  for  higher  educa¬ 
tion,  they  must  have  Christianity  to 
exist.  Christianity  and  religion  have 
influenced  the  world  for  centuries- 
they  must  influence  it  again,  and  it 
must  be  through  the  medium  of  col¬ 
leges  and  schools.” 


The  Sacred  Heart  Review  of  Tune 
2nd,  1904,  inquires: 

“If  the  secularized  public  school  is 
the  only  infallible,  factory  for  turning 
out  good  citizens  of  America,  what 
kind  of  an  American  was  Georee 
Washington?  He  never  attended  a 
secular  public  school.” 


Kind  words  are  like  revelations 
from  heaven,  unraveling  complicated 
misunderstandings  and  softening* 
hardened  convictions  of  years. 


A  PARAGRAPH  FROM 

M  Washington’s  Farewell  Address” 


“Of  all  the  'dispositions  and  habits  which  lead  to  political 
prosperity,  religion  and  morality  are  indispensable  supports. 
In  vain  would  that  man  claim  the  tribute  of  patriotism  who 
should  labor  to  subvert  these  great  pillars  of  human  happiness, 
these  firmest  props  of  the  duties  of  men  and  citizens.  The  mere 
politician,  equally  with  the  pious  man,  ought  to  respect  and 
cherish  them.  A  volume  could  not  trace  all  their  connections 
with  private  and  public  felicity.  Let  it  simply  be  asked,  where 
is  the  security  for  property,  for  reputation,  for  life,  if  the  sense 
of  religious  obligation  desert  the  oaths,  which  are  the  instru¬ 
ments  of  investigation  in  courts  of  justice?  And  let  us  with 
caution  indulge  the  supposition  that  morality  can  be  maintained 
without  religion.  Whatever  may  be  conceded  to  the  influence 
of  refined  education  on  minds  of  peculiar  structure,  reason  and 
experience  both  forbid  us  to  expect  that  national  morality  can 
prevail  in  exclusion  of  religious  principles.” 

And  thus  spoke  “The  Immortal  George,”  “The  Father  of 
His  Country,”  who  was  “First  in  war,  first  in  peace,  and  first  in 
the  hearts  of  his  countrymen.” 


WORTH  REPEATING  AND  REMEMBERING  AS  THE  TRUE  POSI¬ 
TION  OF  CATHOLICS  ON  THE  SCHOOL  QUESTION 


“The  Federated  Catholic  Societies  of  America,”  in  conven¬ 
tion  at  Detroit,  in  January,  1904,  declared  their  position  on  the 
school  question  to  be  as  follows :  “That  there  shall  be  no 
public  moneys  paid  out  for  religious  instruction  in  any  school. 
Let  the  State  examine  parish  or  private  schools,  and  if,  on  ex¬ 
amination,  it  is  found  that  they  are  giving  the  children  an  edu¬ 
cation  which  comes  up  to  the  requirements  of  the  State,  then 
let  the  State  pay  for  it.” 


A, 

Date  Due 


L 2fl- 


**Fc;.  -  Q£I£3-Xf- 
“Th 


j. 


/A 


lot 


-?3  -P 


o  iL-OO 


ible 


“Perish  the  the  light  and  withered  be  tlie  hand  that 
would  be  raised  in  word  or  act  for  the  injury  of  our 
public  schools;”  but  we  also  say,  with  the  Royal  Prophet: 
“In  vain  doth  man  build  a  house  unless  the  Lord  build 
with  him;”  “In  vain  doth  man  keep  watch  over  his  city 
unless  the  Lord  watch  with  him.” 


mu  i  v^/v\^UIN  I 
PAMPHLET  BINDER 

PAT.  NO. 
877188 

Manufactured  by 
GAYLORD  BROS.  Inc. 
Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
Stockton,  Calif. 


3  9031  01041483 


tf 


O 


2  1^14 


BOSTON  COLLEGE  LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  HEIGHTS 
CHESTNUT  HILL,  MASS. 


Books  may  be  kept  for  two  weeks  and  may  be 
renewed  for  the  same  period,  unless  reserved. 

Two  cents  a  day  is  charged  for  each  book  kept 
overtime. 

If  you  cannot  find  what  you  want,  ask  the 
Librarian  who  will  be  glad  to  help  you. 

The  borrower  is  responsible  for  books  drawn 
on  his  card  and  for  all  fines  accruing  on  the  same. 


* 


Jr 


I 


